The interview process started positively but turned frustrating during the final technical phase. After initial conversations and screening, I was given a home assignment that involved solving a real problem from their product. This was a major red flag for me, as it felt like they were using the recruitment process to outsource problem-solving for free, even though they claimed the work wouldn’t be used in production (there is no way to confirm that your work will not be used, which made me uncomfortable.). This is not a standard practice in the industry, and I strongly believe it shouldn’t become one.
What raised further concerns was that they asked me to use their design system to deliver a polished, development-ready solution. It became clear that they weren’t interested in my design process, but in obtaining ideas and solutions, they could implement. This is a sly and tricky approach, recruiting designers while fishing for inspiration to solve real product problems. In my case, they asked me to enhance their “favorites” feature, which, after performing a competitive analysis, I realized was underdeveloped compared to competitors. Their feature was far less complex and useful, which confirmed my suspicion that they were using this process to gather ideas for product improvement.
I want to highlight that this is not acceptable or ethical. It’s a practice that puts candidates in a vulnerable position, especially in today’s competitive job market, and leverages free labor to solve real product issues. This approach should not become the norm in recruitment processes.
The feedback I received after submitting the assignment was brief and vague, especially considering the significant time and effort I put into the task. They didn’t value the process, only the result. The feedback indicated that my presentation was too long and that my knowledge of testing outcomes needed improvement, but it didn’t offer concrete suggestions for improvement. This lack of fair and constructive feedback and the focus on delivering a final product left me feeling undervalued and used.
Another red flag was the questions asked after I presented my home assignment. They asked a few questions, but I had to request they rephrase them because they were poorly constructed. At first, I thought the issue was with my understanding, but later, I realized that the questions didn’t make sense, reflecting their approach's overall chaotic and unprepared nature.
It became clear that, as a startup, they were not ready to work with an experienced product designer who has handled complex SaaS products and worked across various stakeholders. They don’t know what to expect from such a role, and instead, they rely on fragmented, chaotic expectations. You're deemed unfit if you don’t fit their vague, marginal ideas. The lack of clarity in forming questions and the overall communication is a major red flag.
