I interviewed for a Senior Solution Expert role and the process was far more time intensive and disorganized than it needed to be. There were several handoffs across different recruiters and team members, which made ownership of the process unclear. Compensation information also appeared inconsistent between the recruiting partner and DealHub. The early conversations were positive, but the overall candidate experience became increasingly fragmented. The biggest issue was the take-home assignment. Candidates were expected to review DealHub training materials, learn an unfamiliar platform, interpret a detailed customer use case, document clarifying questions and assumptions, create a mind map, configure the solution in the DealHub environment and test the setup in both Admin and Sales Mode. This was not a short assessment. It was closer to a small implementation project and easily required several hours, likely much more for someone trying to complete the configuration properly on a first pass. The assignment did not provide a clear expected time limit or clearly define how complete the build needed to be. I submitted a detailed write-up and was transparent that I had timeboxed the hands-on configuration rather than misrepresenting it as a completed end-to-end build. After investing significant time in the process, I received a generic rejection with no specific feedback. The issue was not simply that I was rejected. The issue was asking candidates to complete a broad unpaid implementation exercise, providing limited clarity on expectations and then offering no meaningful feedback after the time investment. A better process would use a shorter scoped exercise, provide an explicit time limit and evaluate how candidates think rather than how many unpaid hours they are willing to spend learning and configuring the company’s product.