I submitted an application online and had three different touch points with the company: 1) Phone screen/interview with someone from the team 2) Onsite interview 3) Medallia challenge. Overall, it was a good experience, but I did need to wait a while and follow-up in order to receive my ultimate rejection. Looking at this from a strengths and opportunities perspective, I was impressed with the individuals whom I interacted with in regards to their ability to be very engaging/sincerely nice and make the interviews more of a discussion with both a personal and professional aspect to them. My first interviewer served as my main point of contact with a recruiting coordinator scheduling everything. Looking at the opportunities, two areas I felt that could have been a bit better were the final feedback and the Medallia challenge (this may specifically apply to the challenge for the role I applied for). My Medallia challenge was more so an assessment of one's survey design/market research skills. It was not necessarily challenging, but more so subjective and I walked away with the impression that they were more interested in a specific answer than a thought process. Ideally I wish they had made it into more of a presentation wherein you get to do the challenge and the submission entails getting on the phone with someone and explaining to them what you did and why you did it. I say this because there are many ways an individual can approach this and answer it and the final answer that someone chooses does not necessarily reflect the level of analysis they did. Ultimately, the Medallia process went from having a fiber internet connection to going back to the days of 14.4k :o I did reach out to my point of contact after a couple of weeks and promptly received a call back. I was basically told that my challenge reviewer was looking for a more detailed in-depth analysis and that is a vital skill expected to work with customers and unfortunately that would be the end of the interview process. This has actually intrigued me to wonder what the right answer would have been for the challenge more so for the sake of curiosity than anything else. Here's a summary of my two cents: The Good: 1) Culture 2) Motivated/nice people The Bad: 1) The process could be shorter (overall in terms of spanned weeks) 2) The idea of a challenge is good, but either the challenge should be more clear or provide a better opportunity to see a person's thought process/approach.