I recently went through the interview process at Prompt, which included an initial conversation with the technical team, a 2-hour technical challenge, and a 3-hour final interview. The team I spoke with was professional, and I had what felt like a strong and engaging discussion throughout.
I was provided with preparation materials in advance, which I reviewed thoroughly and used to practice relevant scenarios. However, the feedback I received after being passed on was that I seemed to know the technical questions "too well" beforehand, which was confusing given that I had prepared using the materials they provided.
With many years of experience working with customer management and billing systems, I felt well-aligned with the role and believed I could contribute meaningfully to the team. The conversations reinforced that impression, which made the outcome particularly surprising and disappointing.
The process itself was thorough but also quite time-intensive. Given the level of investment required from candidates, clearer alignment on expectations and evaluation criteria would be helpful.
Overall, while the team was professional, the feedback and outcome felt inconsistent with the process, which made the experience frustrating.
Advice to the Hiring Team:
Ensure that interview expectations and evaluation criteria are clearly aligned, especially when providing candidates with preparation materials. Candidates should not be penalized for being well-prepared using the resources provided, and expectations around that preparation should be clearly communicated.