A TERRIBLE experience - frustrating, ambiguous, and damaging.
A very negative and damaging experience, unexpected from a company of such importance.
Technical and functional issues occurred in two sessions, with two retakes granted that cost them nothing, but for the candidate result in serious damage in terms of lost time and missed job opportunities.
An inconsistent and seriously unfair evaluation system, never transparent. They hide behind confidentiality, but when faced with evidence, even when demonstrated in multiple ways, they adjust the reasons, aggravating or downplaying them depending on the outcome they want to achieve. In two sessions they gave significantly different evaluations for the same task, with the same assignment and the same level of execution. This is gravely improper conduct.
On another occasion, for one irrelevant parameter out of five not set, they refused to evaluate four-fifths of the work performed, which was decisive for other successfully completed tasks. Yet, in a pretextual manner, they invalidated the entire task, arbitrarily deducting several points and turning an exam that had been passed without problems into a failed one, requiring a complete retake.
A closed, inconsistent, unfair, and non-transparent system, in which the monopoly allows them to make any decision they want, pretending collaboration and “listening to feedback,” but completely ignoring any observation, even when objectively valid and proven. They always and only want to be right about everything, so as not to create uncomfortable precedents and not to undermine the “credibility” of the system — which, however, turns out to be something entirely different when you actually deal with their processes.
I no longer trust this company: it is just a business, a continuous cash flow fueled by the market, which fortunately for them ensures that companies request this useless and non-meritocratic recognition. One can work perfectly well without it.
A truly TERRIBLE experience.
