The interview process initially seemed thoughtful, but ultimately felt disorganized and not fully respectful of candidate time. I was advanced to a stage that required multiple assessments, including an aptitude test, a personality assessment, and a custom 3-minute Loom assignment explaining which GC AI feature I found most user-friendly and why. After receiving a generic rejection email, I noticed the Loom submission had never actually been viewed. That was disappointing given the amount of time and preparation the assignment required. It created the impression that decisions may have been made before all candidate materials were fully reviewed, or that too many candidates were moved forward relative to the team’s actual review capacity. I completely understand not being selected, especially in a competitive market. However, if companies are going to require unpaid assignments from candidates, there should be confidence that those assignments will actually be reviewed and meaningfully factored into the hiring decision. The team member I interacted with was kind and professional throughout the process, but the overall design of the interview experience did not feel especially thoughtful or well calibrated to the amount of work being asked of candidates. While the Loom assignment itself was only three minutes long, completing it effectively required learning the product, evaluating features, developing a coherent talk track, and recording a polished submission. My recommendation would be to reserve assignment-based stages for candidates the team realistically has the time and intention to fully evaluate, rather than moving a larger volume of applicants forward and making decisions without reviewing all requested materials.