2 Bewertungen von Bewerbern kununu Prüfprozess
kununu Prüfprozess
Score-Details
2 Bewerber haben diesen Arbeitgeber mit durchschnittlich 2,7 Punkten auf einer Skala von 1 bis 5 bewertet.
justtrack GmbH Vorstellungsgespräche
justtrack
GmbH
2 Bewertungen von Bewerbern
Asked for Senior Thinking, Rejected for Thinking Beyond the Brief
Bewerber/inHat sich 2026 in Hamburg als Senior Product Designer beworben und eine Absage erhalten.
Verbesserungsvorschläge
I applied for the Senior Product Designer position, completed the entire interview process, and received a rejection after the final stage.
The process included:
- An initial interview with the recruiter
- An interview with the Lead Product Designer
- An on-site case study followed by a panel presentation
- A final conversation with the Managing Director
After completing all stages and spending around three hours at the office during the final round, my overall impression of the company and the process was mixed, but ultimately more negative than positive.
Positive:
- The recruiter was consistently friendly, supportive and professional
- The product and its AI direction were genuinely interesting
- The office and initial organisation made a good impression
- I received very positive feedback about my AI experience
Negative
1. Technical setup
The final stage included a 60-minute case study: 20 minutes on paper and 40 minutes on a provided laptop. Figma and Claude were installed but not connected, so I had to sign in with a work account provided by my current employer and configure the integration myself during the exercise, which was not an ideal setup for an external case study.
2. Contradictory case-study feedback
The task was to design an AI agent inside the existing product. My concept used a dashboard as the context and entry point: the user first sees an overview and the agent widget, then opens the complete agent response.
I included both the dashboard entry point and the full response requested in the brief. During the presentation, nobody questioned this direction, and I was told that the outcome was liked.
Later, however, I was informed that I had focused too much on the dashboard instead of the agent. I accept that I could have presented the agent earlier and more directly. However, if the purpose of the exercise is to understand a candidate’s product thinking, important decisions should be discussed during the presentation rather than interpreted only afterwards.
3. Limited interaction and empathy
One Senior Product Designer on the panel did not ask a single question or engage with my presentation beyond a brief greeting and goodbye, even when I explicitly invited questions. As this person could have been a future colleague, the lack of interaction made it difficult to understand how collaboration within the design team would work and left me with a negative impression.
At the same time, I was told that the Managing Director had interpreted my calm and focused communication as a possible lack of energy and felt that I might need to be pushed. As a full-time employee, I had taken time away from work at my own expense to participate in around three hours of interviews and an intensive case study on an unfamiliar laptop. Considering the circumstances, I felt that this conclusion was based on very limited context. A calm communication style should not automatically be interpreted as a lack of motivation, initiative, or ownership.
4. Communication after the interview
After the final stage, I received no update for more than a week. Two short questions about the expected timeline remained unanswered.
Suggestions:
- Send the case study in advance and use the on-site meeting for presentation and discussion, or compensate candidates for an extensive live assignment
- If the task must be completed on-site, provide a fully working technical setup
- Use the presentation to challenge assumptions and understand the candidate’s decisions
- Ensure that all panel members actively participate in the discussion
- Align the panel on clear evaluation criteria
- Communicate delays and recognise the time and effort invested by candidates
- Evaluate motivation with more context and empathy, rather than through one high-pressure situation
The product remains interesting, but under the same conditions I would not go through this process again.
This review reflects only my personal experience with the recruitment process. I have tried to describe it as clearly and objectively as possible, and other candidates may have a different experience. I wish the company and the team all the best and hope that this feedback helps improve the process for future candidates.
Erklärung der weiteren Schritte
Professionalität des Gesprächs
Zufriedenstellende Reaktion
Wertschätzende Behandlung
Vollständigkeit der Infos
Erwartbarkeit des Prozesses
Zufriedenstellende Antworten
Zeitgerechte Zu- oder Absage
Angenehme Atmosphäre
Schnelle Antwort
1Hilfreichfindet das hilfreichZustimmenZustimmen?MeldenTeilen
I think is extremely rude to make someone wait for more than one month for the code review and finally not giving any.
Bewerber/inHat sich 2026 in Hamburg als Software Engineer beworben und eine Absage erhalten.
Verbesserungsvorschläge
I had to made a Code challenge, what I did. It took them more than one month to open the file. I was finally rejected (which is understandable) but I never got a code review, which would be the standard for this case
Erklärung der weiteren Schritte
Professionalität des Gesprächs
Zufriedenstellende Reaktion
Wertschätzende Behandlung
Vollständigkeit der Infos
Erwartbarkeit des Prozesses
Zufriedenstellende Antworten
Zeitgerechte Zu- oder Absage
Angenehme Atmosphäre
Schnelle Antwort
1Hilfreichfindet das hilfreichZustimmenZustimmen?MeldenTeilen