ANSR

What’s the point of giving candidates an assignment if you’re going to reject them in the final round anyway? I cleared the first round, where I answered the AEO, GEO, and SEO-related questions correctly. I was then given an assignment, which I completed and submitted on time. After that, I was called to the office for the final round. However, the questions asked in the final interview were mostly hypothetical “what if” scenarios. Even when I answered them, the interviewer would say things like, “That’s not how it works.” When I came home and researched the questions, I found that many of the answers I had given were actually correct. This makes me wonder: what is the point of making candidates go through multiple rounds and spend time completing assignments if the evaluation process is going to be so inconsistent? The process felt unrealistic and poorly aligned with the role. For a position advertised as SEO, candidates were also expected to have knowledge of web development. If web development knowledge is a requirement, it should be clearly mentioned in the job description instead of being introduced unexpectedly during the final interview. Candidates’ time matters too. Companies should have a clear, consistent, and transparent evaluation process so that both the candidate and the company can make the best use of their time.

Very long interview process ,loss of hopes due to long interview almost i gave 7 rounds just for it and also paid less almost 1 momth process also if someone knows your feedback is not good they won't make an effort to inform the feedback after 6 rounds.

The interview process took less than a week, and I completed three rounds: an initial screening round, an assignment round, and a technical interview. From my perspective, they seemed to expect a lot from a single candidate. I felt they were looking for someone to handle responsibilities beyond a typical SEO role, which didn't seem very realistic. I also felt that they placed more emphasis on theoretical knowledge than practical experience. I spent considerable time preparing a 10-page assignment as requested, but it was only discussed for about five minutes during the interview. I don't fully understand what more they were expecting, especially since I have experience with AI, SEO, and hands-on execution. Overall, I feel like I invested a significant amount of time without getting a fair opportunity to demonstrate my practical skills.

The interview process was well organised and conducted in a structured manner. It began with a brief introduction about the role and the organisation, which helped set clear expectations. The interviewer then covered my professional background and experience, followed by role-specific and technical questions relevant to the position. Adequate time was provided to explain my answers and discuss real-life scenarios. The interaction was two-way, allowing me to ask questions and gain clarity about the role, team structure, and expectations. The interview concluded with an overview of the next steps, making the entire process smooth, transparent, and positive.

The company had reached out to me saying they have openings for their client Albertsons and I was interested in opportunity. I cleared screening round and had in person technical interview at Albertsons. The interview difficulty was easy to moderate level, Asked me to write pseudo code of a spring boot API to get User details with Id and Get user details from Frontend as well. I had written and showed, also asked few technical questions which I answered expect one. After the interview there was no call back from company, after few days I called HR few times and I didn't get proper response from them and One day I got regret mail without mentioning feedback. One important note is I even got regret mail before attending technical interview as well. When I showed them regret mail before interview, the said it's sent by mistake. This hiring process is really crap and pathetic. No proper management of hiring and ghosting candidates after interview.