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

The environment was clean, and the interviewers 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 toward interviewees after participating in it, provided as a reference for those preparing to submit their résumés to this company:

1. Overly cumbersome online tests unrelated to the position

- Before the interview, HR required me to complete a comprehensive aptitude test covering “English, verbal comprehension, numerical concepts, spatial concepts, perceptual speed, logical reasoning, and memory,” among other areas. The format was similar to a combination of civil service entry-level examination 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 particularly unfriendly to non-native speakers or those unable to adapt to an English environment in a short period of 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 creating unnecessary psychological pressure and a sense of frustration.

2. Lack of trust in the company’s 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 onsite, which demonstrated the company’s lack of trust in its own tools and in the applicant’s abilities.

3. No computer equipment provided onsite, yet handwritten programming was required

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

4. The job responsibilities and position scope were not clearly explained

- The job description did not clearly state that “full-stack capabilities” were required. It was only mentioned in the later stages of the interview that I had to be able to write frontend code, resulting in a significant gap between the job expectations and reality.

5. An additional practical assignment was added after the interview without reasonable guidelines or safeguards

- Without sufficient communication between both parties, the company directly required me 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, leaving the applicant to determine the development direction and details independently.

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

- More regrettably, the practical assignment included no explanation of the salary range, no guarantee of a hiring opportunity, and no concrete arrangements for the process after completion. The company merely 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. The applicant’s background was not clarified, yet a shift to a different function was subsequently required

- Although the company knew that I came from a backend background, it required the practical assignment to include UI screens and basic frontend design, making the functional requirements seriously inconsistent with the role applied for.

7. The overall interview design lacked structure, and the sense of institutionalization was weak

- From the initial interview through the assignment arrangements and responses, there was no clear, standardized process, raising doubts about whether the company had a well-established talent recruitment system and organizational procedures.

8. The promise to notify applicants regardless of the hiring outcome was not fulfilled

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