The interview process was good at first, but it spiraled toward the end with a take-home test the team had just rolled out for the first time and seemed to not understand how to frame. The test asked you not to think about x when proposing your solutions, making your deck, etc. Then when it was time to present, questions about x were asked by the person in charge of x. In feedback later I was told I didn't impact-size the solutions presented. ... In fact, I'd shared the level of effort required to make each solution happen, its impact on which metrics, as well as the order I would tackle each one in to balance speed and good outcomes. I was also told I didn't provide enough depth. ... I had cited sources, explained reasoning, walked through hypotheses and described how each solution should be implemented, step by technical step, inside their platform. I am sincerely unclear on what more a candidate is supposed to give, especially in an assignment that is supposed to take no more than a couple hours. Was further told my solutions "only" discussed a, b and c (easy-to-implement things) when in fact they'd also discussed d, e and f (harder-to-implement things). Since I started simple before going complex, it feels like the team stopped listening. Summary: Interview process was OK until the perplexingly flawed assignment at the end. Seemed to reflect a team unsure of its own expectations. Confusing and weird experience.