I found the interview process emotionally draining, creatively exhausting, and extremely time-consuming. First red flag: A very comprehensive assignment was required before any interview or introductory conversation was offered. Aside from the online job description, there was no opportunity to speak with the team to better understand expectations, scope, or fit. The assignment felt heavily weighted toward the company’s benefit, and it raised concerns about fairness and transparency. A preliminary chat would have helped candidates decide whether committing significant time and creative energy was reasonable. Second red flag: The assignment itself was extensive, involving at least 10 deliverables — including logo work, typography, colour palette, three packaging concepts, and a social media post — plus “bonus ideas.” This was for an existing brand. While the company assured candidates that ideas would not be used, it is difficult not to feel uncomfortable knowing these concepts could still serve as internal thought starters. The scope felt disproportionate for a hiring exercise. Third red flag: After presenting the assignment and attending the interview, I was given four separate dates on which I was told I would receive an outcome. Each time, the date was postponed to accommodate more interviews. This lack of follow-through felt unprofessional and disorganised, especially given the amount of effort already invested. Fourth red flag: During the prolonged waiting period, I noticed the same role reposted with a significantly lower salary band. This raised serious concerns about whether the company knew what they were looking for, and whether candidates’ time and effort were being respected while internal expectations were still shifting. Overall, the process felt poorly managed and placed a heavy burden on candidates without sufficient clarity or consideration. I hope the company reflects on how its hiring process impacts creative professionals and considers a more respectful, transparent approach in the future.