The hiring process starts with a 1 hour talk with the SVP of engineering. This is a set o presentation about product / teams / hiring process / etc. The presentation were generally interesting and useful. What I missed is that the talk was a bit of a one sided conversation. They do not want to learn about you, your experience or skills at this point. The next step is a code project. The task is to build a (seemingly) simple web application, based on a set of instructions in a PDF. The project is expected to "take about twelve hours to complete". You have 4 days to submit a solution. The project is needed to be done is a given web framework. This was a new framework for me. But nothing seemed wrong with that, until I submitted a solution. After submitting a solution, they rejected my application. After I asked for feedback, it turned out their actual requirements and expectations, were not really clear and far from what was in the provided instructions: - what they expect is a fully polished, fully (/over) tested, production ready and bug-free project - you're expected have tests from unit to top-level app tests (requirements only mentions "some automated test coverage") - you're supposed to implement some use cases which are not clear and not even possible according to what is in the given instructions Until this point in the hiring process, they showed like zero interest to learn more about my experience or skills. It is a bit unfortunate that they expect you to take a considerable amount of time doing the code project, but then they do no even take the effort to have a meaningful face-to-face conversation with you. This feels like a bit of a lack of respect towards the candidate.

After the introduction meeting with an HR person, I was asked to do a home code project. According to the public hiring process description, it is expected that the code project would require around 12 hours of work. It did take me around that amount of work to finish the project. Two days after sending them my project, I was informed that they had decided not to continue the process with me and they gave me an option to meet with the HR person again to receive feedback regarding the code project. At the feedback meeting, the HR read the feedback written by engineers aloud. Of course , she was not able to elaborate on anything mentioned in the feedback. I asked her to share the feedback as text, but apparently that was also forbidden. Feedback itself was pretty detailed, but a big part of it was discussing the flaws in the frontend part of the application. I had no idea why the test task for backend engineer contained a frontend part, so I implemented a very minimal frontend to support my solution. Apparently, it was a mistake. Some other mistakes included not meeting some requirements not mentioned in the specification. That could have been an interesting topic to discuss during the interview, but I did not get to see one technical person during the whole process. Overall, this experience brought me back to my university student years, when the starting point of the exam was the belief in my worthlessness and it was made clear to me that I didn't deserve the time nor the attention of my examinators. I don't know what kind of internal culture can produce this kind of interview process and at this point I don't want to know. HR was nice though.