I want to start by saying I think Health IQ has a great business model and I really like the direction the company is going. That being said, I had a pretty negative experience interviewing with the company. In summary, I spent a total of 7.5 hours testing and interviewing for the position and eventually was rejected. I can deal with rejection, but this on in particular stung. The order: 30 min phone screen 2 hour online screening test 1 hour 1:1 interview 3.5 hours of further 1:1 interviews 30 min Arch of Accomplishment (AoA) Things felt like they were going well throughout the entire process. By the time I made it to the last interview, I really felt like the AoA was just a formality. They even had me complete intake paperwork beforehand. I did my AoA. It felt a little silly, but I didn't think it was that bad. Then I heard back, "We're considering other candidates". I think you know where this is going. Yep, offer declined. I'm fine with rejection. But why would you string a candidate along for so long? Hire them or don't! And why make them fill out intake paperwork? While we are on the subject, they could definitely improve their interview process. The online quiz I took consisted of multiple online questions. One of them was SQL. I can deal with SQL, but the website they used would take literally 2 minutes to return a query. I actually thought the site wasn't working when I took the test. The 3 hours of 1:1 interviews could be a 1 hour panel interview. All three interviewers asked my the same question. Oh yeah! One of the interviewers was out that day and I had to reschedule with someone else who wasn't even prepared. There I was telling the guy what websites to use to do live coding exercises with me! I almost forgot about that. As far as the AoA goes, I think it's a great idea that could be fun, but I think the founders of the company have taken it to a place that is unsettling. I don't want to go into details for the sake of maintaining personal information, but if you even get to that point, you'll probably end up rolling your eyes at a few the founder's AoA's. It's, ridiculous. The feedback I got was the CEO didn't like me and the person I originally met with didn't like me. The 3 1:1's went well and my AoA went well. If that was the case, why string me along through this process? Hire people or don't, but don't drag them through this process.

1) Met recruiter -> 2) video chat CTO -> 3) take-home test -> 4) brag sheet -> 5) in-office The process was so convoluted that I tried to cancel after they sprung the take-home on me suddenly... like literally days after I was told the next step would be an in-office. The recruiter talked me down by bumping up my salary ask to something at the top of market for SD, so I continued. Did the take-home, brag sheet, and went into the office. Met the CTO and CEO in person while talking to the dev team in SV remotely. The CEO asked me why I switched jobs so often and literally missed a crucial detail on my resume explaining the last company I worked out was formed with the founding team from my previous company. The CTO asked if "I played well with others". They literally had a gym in the middle of a janky non-descript office park office. It was weird. I was told by the CTO they would get back to me the next day. 5 days later I followed up, not because I would accept an offer, but because it was one of my first interviews being newly on the market and I wanted it to leverage against other opportunities. They said 'no' with no explanation. Just kinda a scummy business and vibe in total. Avoid.