Applied for a sales role recently and was very let down by the hiring experience. The process included a case study that required designing a Week 1 GTM pipeline strategy for a 500-lead book, to be submitted in a 2-slide deck. Despite the clear instruction that the task should take 6–8 hours, feedback was given the following working day at 9:30am — suggesting it was either skimmed or a decision had already been made. The feedback lacked depth and seemed to focus on details that were trade-offs in a constrained slide format — e.g., a desire for 6–7 layer RevOps segmentation, which was neither aligned with the job description nor practical for the case structure provided. The entire experience felt like the expectations were not clearly communicated upfront. If you’re seeking a 12-page GTM whitepaper, then that should be made clear — candidates will rise to the occasion if given accurate instructions. Ambiguity in scope and speed of feedback undercut the quality of the process. Additionally, the hiring composition across the team seems skewed — while diversity is important, so is balance. It’s critical to ensure hiring is inclusive and fair, especially in high-performance sales teams. Disappointed to have spent considerable time on a case study that didn’t reflect the evaluation criteria. Hope the team reviews its hiring transparency and fairness moving forward.

This is for the US Inbound Account Executive team. The recruiter was incredibly responsive and on top of scheduling. The process was also concise, efficient, and reflected to the day to the day of the job itself! Overview of the process looked like this: - recruiter screen - hiring manager screen - Australia team lead screen (since Australia is where the company is based) - final mock discovery call (with hiring manager & other Airwallex leader)