Candidatei-me de outra forma. O processo levou 3 meses. Fui entrevistado pela Productive Edge em jan. de 2025
Entrevista
Productive Edge contacted me pre-emptively without me submitting a resume.
I spoke with the HR screener, the hiring manager, and a member of senior leadership over the course of one week.
I was told I had to wait while another decision-maker recovered from a health problem. TWO MONTHS later, they were still not ready to move forward, so I withdrew myself.
A month after that (2+ months since they reached out to me pro-actively), the recruiter emailed me again and asked to resume the process. I gave them my availability, and followed up with my availability every few days for two additional weeks.
Finally, two weeks after asking me to re-engage, and without any further commentary from them, the role was closed again. It's one of the most unprofessional interactions I've ever had with a company. They asked me TWICE to submit to their process, and had no process ready.
Candidatei-me online. O processo levou 3 semanas. Fui entrevistado pela Productive Edge em jun. de 2025
Entrevista
Had an initial screening with the recruiter, moved onto the next round which included an assignment, and third round I met with the Head of Marketing. I was told that I was an ideal candidate, that they enjoyed my work, etc. but then they proceeded to ghost me for almost 2 weeks. Lo and behold I checked their website and hiring for the position has been put "on hold". At the very least I would have appreciated being informed that they were no longer hiring for the role than having to deal with radio silence and doing my own research to get answers. This behavior unfortunately is becoming more commonplace for the job hunt, but we shouldn't let it. It feels incredibly disrespectful.
Candidatei-me por meio de recrutador(a). O processo levou 2 semanas. Fui entrevistado pela Productive Edge (Nashville, TN) em set. de 2024
Entrevista
Glassdoor Review Draft:
Rating: ★★☆☆☆ (2/5)
Title: Dismissive Interview Process and Concerns About Company's Direction
Pros:
1. The initial communication from the recruiting team was prompt and professional.
2. The interview was scheduled quickly, and there was transparency about the interview stages.
Cons:
1. The interview felt like a no-win scenario from the start. The interviewer seemed dismissive and uninterested in my answers, moving quickly from one technical question to another without giving me time to elaborate or demonstrate my skills fully.
2. There was little to no positive reinforcement or constructive feedback throughout the process. The interviewer often cut me off or redirected the conversation, making it difficult to gauge whether I was addressing his concerns.
3. The company appeared not to value Microsoft certifications, such as my DP-203, which is highly relevant for data engineering roles. Despite this being an important credential, it was never acknowledged or considered during the interview. The Chief Data Architect also held no recent relevant Microsoft certifications, possibly viewing certified individuals as a political threat.
4. I was concerned about the company’s recent layoffs from September 2023 to September 2024, which resulted in a significant reduction in staff, including another DP-203 holder. Furthermore, the role I applied for was never posted externally, raising doubts about internal dynamics and the actual intent behind the hiring process.
Advice to Management:
Improve the interview process by fostering a more open and engaging dialogue. Allow candidates to fully explain their experience and provide constructive feedback rather than making the interview feel like a rapid-fire test with a predetermined outcome. Recognize the value of industry-recognized certifications, particularly when they are directly relevant to the role, and be more transparent about the company’s direction and hiring intentions, especially in light of recent layoffs and internal politics.
Perguntas de entrevista [1]
Pergunta 1
The most over-the-top question INTERVIEWER asked was likely one involving a case scenario about optimizing "first-click attribution" for an enterprise e-commerce website, using a messaging bus like Kafka or Azure Event Hub, with a data ingestion rate of 10 million messages per minute. He wanted to know my approach to handling this data, including service choices and implementation steps to make the data consumable for the stakeholders.
The question was over the top for a few reasons:
1. It involved multiple layers—selecting the appropriate tools, setting up data ingestion and processing pipelines, and optimizing data for real-time attribution analysis—all under significant data volume and velocity constraints.
2. INTERVIEWER asked you to devise an end-to-end solution, including technical decisions, without providing enough time to properly analyze or think through the problem. He wanted you to solve a highly complex scenario on the fly, which is not a reasonable expectation for a typical interview setting.
3. While providing constraints like the volume of data and some basic requirements, INTERVIEWER left out many details that would be crucial for designing a solution, such as specific business requirements, data quality expectations, and the existing technical architecture.
This question felt designed to challenge you in an impractical way, possibly setting up a scenario where it would be difficult to provide a fully satisfying answer in the limited time available.