Workplace reviews and discussion: 無限創意科技工程有限公司

The environment was clean, and the interviewers on the day were polite and provided a cup of water.

Overall, this interview experience was disappointing. The following are aspects of the process that I found unreasonable or disrespectful to interviewees after personally participating, provided as a reference for friends preparing to submit resumes to this company:

1. Overly cumbersome online assessments unrelated to the position

- Before the interview, HR required me to complete a general aptitude test including “English, verbal comprehension, numerical concepts, spatial concepts, perceptual speed, logical reasoning, and memory.” Its format resembled a combination of civil service preliminary exam questions, psychological assessments, and comprehensive college entrance exam questions.

- In addition, I had to complete a Codility programming algorithm challenge with an English-language interface, which was very unfriendly to non-native speakers or those unable to adapt to an English environment in a short time. These assessments had relatively little connection to the actual position applied for, and the company did not explain how the results would be incorporated into the hiring evaluation, easily causing unnecessary psychological pressure and a sense of frustration.

2. Lack of trust in its own assessment tools, requiring repeated problem-solving

- Even after answering all questions perfectly and providing detailed comments, I was still required to solve the problems again on paper at the interview, demonstrating the company’s lack of trust in its own tools and in applicants’ abilities.

3. No computer equipment provided on-site, yet applicants were required to handwrite code

- Although I applied for a software engineer position, the company did not prepare a laptop or any equipment at all and required me to handwrite algorithms and system logic using pen and paper. This was extremely disrespectful toward an engineering role.

4. Failure to clearly explain the job responsibilities and position scope

- The JD did not clearly state that “full-stack capabilities” were required. Only later in the interview did the company mention that I had to be able to write frontend code, creating a significant gap between the job expectations and reality.

5. Additional practical assignment after the interview without reasonable guidelines or safeguards

- Without sufficient communication between both parties, the company directly required the interviewee to complete an additional technical assignment, such as a full-stack backend system. However, the assignment completely lacked clear specifications regarding the functional scope, API examples, response formats, or logic. The applicant had to determine the development direction and details entirely independently.

- This not only created psychological pressure and a time burden, but also reflected the company’s arbitrary and inconsistent approach to technical evaluations, raising doubts about whether it lacked an effective talent assessment system.

- More regrettably, the assignment provided no salary range, guarantee of an offer, or specific arrangements for the process after completion. The company only stated that it would “observe the completion time and approach,” effectively shifting all costs and risks of the applicant’s investment back onto the applicant. This was extremely unfriendly to job seekers with limited time who participated in good faith.

6. Failure to clarify the interviewee’s background, followed by a request to shift to a different function

- Although the company knew the applicant had a backend background, it required the practical assignment to include UI screens and basic frontend design. The functional requirements were seriously inconsistent with the role applied for.

7. The overall interview design lacked structure and showed weak institutional processes

- From the initial interview through the assignment arrangements and follow-up responses, there was no evidence of a systematic process or consistent standards. This raises doubts about whether the company has a sound internal talent recruitment system and organizational processes.

8. Failure to fulfill the promise to notify applicants regardless of the outcome

- The company initially promised that it would “notify applicants regardless of the result,” but in practice, it provided no response at all for more than two weeks, raising doubts about its basic workplace reliability and integrity.