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 courteous and provided a cup of water.

Overall, this interview experience was disappointing. Based on my actual participation, the following are aspects of the process that I found unreasonable or disrespectful toward interviewees, shared for those preparing to apply to this company:

1. Excessively cumbersome online tests that were 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.” The format was similar to a combination of civil service preliminary examination questions, psychological assessments, and college entrance examination 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 creating unnecessary psychological pressure and a sense of frustration.

2. Lack of confidence in its own testing tools, requiring candidates to solve the problems again

- Even after answering perfectly and providing detailed comments, I was still required to solve the problems 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 was provided onsite, yet candidates were required to handwrite code

- For a software engineer 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. The job responsibilities and position scope were not clearly explained

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

5. An implementation task was added 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 implementation task, such as a full-stack back-office system. However, the task lacked clear specifications regarding 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 technical evaluation and raised doubts about whether it lacked an effective talent assessment system.

- More regrettably, the implementation task provided no information about a salary range, no assurance of a possibility of employment, and no concrete process arrangements 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. The applicant’s background was not clarified, yet the role was later shifted toward a different function

- Although the company knew the applicant had a backend background, it required an implementation task involving 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 the systemization was weak

- From the initial interview through the task assignment and subsequent responses, there was no evidence of a systematic process or unified standards, raising doubts about whether the company has a well-established talent recruitment system and organizational processes.

8. The promise to notify candidates regardless of the hiring outcome was not honored

- The company initially promised that it would “notify candidates regardless of the result,” but in practice, it did not respond at all for more than two weeks, calling its basic workplace reliability and integrity into question.