Aftershoot

Had a disappointing experience with the hiring process. The candidate went through multiple rounds and completed six assignments, followed by weeks of no communication and multiple follow-ups just to receive an update. Eventually, we were informed that there was no position available. More clarity about the role and hiring status from the beginning would have saved a significant amount of time and effort.

Round 1 — HR Screen Standard calls after applying through the careers page. Professional and straightforward. Round 2 — VP of Marketing The conversation stayed at a surface level throughout, focused on my general workflows and approaches. For a company whose core product is AI, I expected some depth on AI in content marketing or at least a perspective on where the category is heading. There was none. When I asked follow-up questions to understand the company's AI content workflows, the responses were vague. A VP of Marketing should be able to articulate a sharper POV than what came through here. Round 3 — Culture Fit with Head of People Success Warm, well-structured, and genuinely pleasant. This person clearly understood talent management. In hindsight, I think I understand why the process was fast-tracked to this round (maybe a departing position needed to be filled ASAP) Round 4 — Takeaway Assignment The brief stated the assignment should take 3 to 4 hours. What they actually asked for was a 6-month content strategy with channel ratios, traffic and signup projections, a research-backed article with distribution plan, delegation framework, and a content scaling system. I took two and a half days and delivered something I stand behind completely. One additional flag: I applied for a Content Lead role. But on the assignment document, the title had shifted to Sr. Content Marketing Manager with no explanation offered. It broadly aligned with my experience so I did not make much of it, but worth knowing going in. Round 5 — Panel Presentation One panelist was on time. One did not show up. The VP joined 15 minutes late. When I raised the title mismatch and the assignment time estimate, the responses were unconvincing. A panel should arrive with pinpointed questions and genuine feedback rather than expecting the candidate to monologue for an hour. Within the assignment I had identified 2-3 critical business issues that was part of the assignment of going beyond content. Rather than treating this as a strategic audit, the VP repeatedly pushed me to go deeper into the live problem. At one point he suggested I should "be more trusting" when I declined to go further into the solutions as I've clearly stated I've faced such issues in interviews before. A senior leader should should know where the scope of an assignment ends and paid consultation begins. The assignment was a real creative challenge and I am proud of the work. But the process revealed a gap between the quality of thinking the role demands and the quality of thinking being applied to hiring for it. Candidates, please avoid marketing jobs here and proceed with due diligence!

Phone call: covered the basics Interview with Design Lead: Explained my case studies, process, experiences from past projects Technical Round with Design Lead and HR: Reviewed the Aftershoot app prior to the interview, audited the issues, solved one of them together

3 round of interview. 1-Technical: Basic questions about ML/DL applications 2-Assignment: Assignment was related to their work, they are looking for your approach to solve the assignment. 3-Discussion around assignment

It was an average difficulty interview process. First was a screening round which mostly talked about experiences on similar projects. I was given a task and was asked to complete it. The second round was based on the task that was assigned to me. Questions were based on the task itself.