Workplace reviews and discussion: 聯潤科技股份有限公司

None

1. The position being interviewed for was in the legal category, but the company’s internal positioning of the role was unclear. It felt as though executives from two different departments were vying with each other for human resources.

During the interview, they only said that the short-term work would involve patent applications, but completely avoided discussing the long-term responsibilities.

There were three executives present at the interview, but all three kept avoiding discussing the exact job responsibilities. They only said that the current plan was for this position to handle patent applications, without explaining what the long-term responsibilities would be.

It felt as though the legal executive kept asking whether the candidate could write and review contracts, so is this position for a legal professional or a patent specialist?

2. They were extremely unwilling to provide resources for patent applications.

Because the company wants to pursue a stock market listing in mainland China, it urgently needs a large number of patents to pad its numbers. However, it also wants to cut costs by not outsourcing the drafting work to a patent firm. As a result, the person interviewing for this position is expected to handle every aspect of patent applications, from discussing patent proposals with R&D, prior-art searches, drafting patent content, preparing drawings, contacting foreign patent firms to coordinate filings, filing independently with the Taiwan authorities, and processing expense reimbursements afterward, among other tasks—all to be completed independently by “one person.” The expected volume is more than 10 applications per year, making it even more exploitative than working at a patent firm.

Most disrespectfully, one executive kept aggressively asking how quickly the candidate could complete the entire application process—exactly the kind of thing an exploitative old-school boss would say.

Even most small patent firms divide the work among drawing preparation, drafting, administrative filing, and liaising with overseas contacts in order to improve efficiency. Yet this company is so stingy that it is unwilling to spend that money.

Moreover, patent drafting varies by technical field, yet this person would be expected to handle drafting for every type of patent. This clearly shows that the company has no respect whatsoever for legal professionals.

3. The interviewers were extremely disrespectful.

A résumé had been provided in advance, and the candidate also gave a presentation and self-introduction during the interview. Nevertheless, the executive conducting the interview repeatedly got the candidate’s current employer wrong. Even after the candidate tactfully restated the name of their current employer, the executive still managed to keep getting it wrong, which was truly remarkable.

In addition, the candidate was required to keep their camera on throughout the interview, while none of the senior interviewers turned on their cameras. Very respectful indeed.