My interview experience with Well Health Technologies left me with some concerns about their hiring process. My initial meeting was with the VP of Engineering, who, I was told, was relatively new to the company. While this meeting was described as an introductory discussion about the hiring process, it did include some basic interview questions.
The next step involved a challenging online coding assessment. It consisted of 15 multiple-choice questions, the majority of which were quite technical, for example focusing on specific Linux commands and Kubernetes cluster deployment from the terminal. In addition, the assessment included three LeetCode medium-level programming problems. All of this was to be completed within a 2.5-hour time limit.
Frankly, I found the assessment to be excessively difficult, even for a senior engineer. I question whether many engineers, including those currently at Well Health, could realistically complete it within the allotted time. It felt like they were searching for a "unicorn" candidate with an exceptionally broad and deep skillset.
Furthermore, the unproctored nature of the assessment raises concerns about its validity. Without proctoring, it's difficult to ensure the integrity of the results. I would suggest Well Health consider revising the assessment to be more realistic and relevant to the role, perhaps focusing on practical problem-solving skills rather than obscure technical details. Proctoring the assessment would also be beneficial to ensure a fair and accurate evaluation of candidates. This would help them identify truly capable and honest individuals.
