They reached out to me via email about the role since I had relevant experience in what they were looking to hire for. I spoke to a recruiter about the role, company and my background and everything seemed to be looking good. Then the following day I get an automated rejection email. After reading through all the glassdoor reviews, it seems this company doesn't really have any intention of hiring. I ticked all their boxes and was reached out by them yet was rejected for no reason. Even after asking for actual feedback about what went into the decision so that I have an idea on why it didn't work out. I got nothing from them, I would advise people look elsewhere since they are keen on wasting peoples time.

Overall the interview process was pretty straightforward. The interview steps: 1. 30 minute introductory chat with recruiter 2. Take-home coding exercise (2-hour time limit) 3. 60 minute (technical) interview with an engineer 4. 90 minute (technical) interview with an engineer 5. 45 minute chat with their head of engineering 6. 60 minute chat with one of their founders I completed up to step four (4), the 90 minute technical interval, before I got an email a few days after explaining that they were not moving forward with the last two (2) interviews. I thought the interviews went well (was able to complete the given tasks), but there obviously were some things I didn’t quite hit the mark on from their perspective. I asked for feedback so that I could understand where I could improve (since none was provided during the interviews), but I was told they that do not share feedback, which is very unfortunate, especially since they claimed it “was a particularly difficult decision for [them] to make” and their team believed I “have a tremendous amount of potential”. The interviews themselves were well-structured, using Google Meet and CoderPad. The questions were pretty open-ended, which I usually appreciate, since it allows for creativity and more honest conversations to occur, but I felt like the first technical interview was a bit too open. The openness of the second technical interview felt more appropriate. I would say the technical problems presented for the take-home and live-coding interviews were some of the better ones I have done, especially from a startup, but I do not think there was enough breathing room to get to know the interviewers and learn about the company before or after the coding challenges. If I had to provide some feedback to make the process better: 1. Provide feedback, especially after the interviewee has already spent at least three (3) hours of their time interviewing 2. Provide more time for the interviewee to ask questions about the company and role - interviews should go both ways, and these felt a bit too one-sided 3. Maybe add an interview with a manager/ HR-knowledgeable person earlier in the process (maybe step 4, in between the two technical interviews) 4. Since they require at least a hybrid approach, maybe have the option for some of the interviews be in-person