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

The environment was clean, and the staff conducting the interview that 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 actually taking part, provided as a reference for those preparing to submit a résumé to this company:

1. Excessively cumbersome online tests unrelated to the position

- Before the interview, HR required me to complete a comprehensive aptitude test containing sections such as “English, verbal comprehension, numerical concepts, spatial concepts, perceptual speed, logical reasoning, and memory.” The format resembled a combination of civil service preliminary-exam questions, psychological assessments, and 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 tests 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 frustration.

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

- Even after answering the questions perfectly and providing detailed comments, I was still required to solve them again on paper in person, indicating that the company lacked trust in its own tools and applicants’ abilities.

3. No computer equipment provided on-site, yet handwritten programming was required

- For a software engineering position, the company did not prepare a laptop or any equipment at all, instead requiring algorithms and system logic to be written by hand on paper. This was extremely disrespectful to an engineering role.

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

- The JD did not clearly state that “full-stack capabilities” were required. It was only mentioned late in the interview that front-end development skills were necessary, resulting in a major 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 back-office system. However, the assignment lacked clear specifications for the functional scope, API examples, response formats, or logic. The applicant had to determine the development direction and details independently.

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

- More regrettably, the practical assignment provided no salary range, guarantee of a hiring opportunity, or concrete 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 back-end background, it required the practical assignment to include a UI, basic front-end design, and other responsibilities seriously inconsistent with the applied role.

7. Overall interview design lacked structure and a sense of institutionalization

- From the initial interview through the assignment arrangements and responses, there was no evidence of a systematic process or consistent standards, making me question whether the company had a well-developed talent recruitment system and organizational procedures.

8. Failure to keep its promise to notify applicants of the result

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