The interview process with Wolt was overall lengthy and somewhat frustrating, lasting nearly two months from start to finish. During this time, candidates were required to complete a substantial task clearly aligned with the strategic responsibilities of the role. However, as the process unfolded, multiple aspects surfaced that significantly diminished my interest in the position. Communication was inconsistent; notably, the final notification, ambiguously titled "Your Next Steps with Wolt," arrived three weeks later than initially indicated. Although I anticipated this would be a polite rejection, I took the opportunity to gain feedback on my performance and the recruitment process. Unfortunately, this followup meeting merely reinforced the issues I had already identified. Specifically, the internal operations seemed chaotic, emphasizing highvolume production of creative materials each month—an approach that felt unsustainable and indicative of a highrisk burnout environment. Throughout the meetings, interviewers appeared to be reading questions from what felt like AIgenerated prompts, creating an impersonal and robotic experience. This aspect also highlighted clear indicators of mismatch between my own interests and the role's expectations, solidifying my decision not to pursue the opportunity further. On a positive note, this clarity emerged directly from the interview process itself, making it evident why the role was unsuitable. Furthermore, feedback provided during these meetings unintentionally revealed negative aspects within the organization, such as a lack of cross-communication and engagement between teams. These insights raised additional concerns about internal collaboration and organizational culture. The assignment provided during the recruitment phase was particularly challenging and raised concerns about companies leveraging such processes for free creative labor. As additional meetings were requested, the process started intruding significantly into my working hours, making it difficult to balance with my ongoing responsibilities. Another notable oversight was the lack of transparency regarding compensation. Despite investing considerable time and effort into multiple stages of the interview process, I never received details about the salary, which seemed highly unreasonable given the overall commitment required. Lastly, being an Americanbased company, global events seemed to add layers of complexity and potential internal disruption, likely contributing to the prolonged and disorganized nature of the hiring process. Overall, the experience left much to be desired, highlighting critical areas for improvement in candidate communication, transparency, workload management, and process efficiency.