The interview process starts with a standard 30-minute recruiter screen, focusing on background and experience. In the second round, you’re assigned a take-home assessment that will require you to code a server in your preferred programming language implementing several bullet points of requirements. This server has to feature multiple endpoints that interact with the Wikimedia API, and the finished product is to be hosted on GitHub. Unfortunately, this marked the end of my journey, as I didn't advance to the third round so I can’t speak to what that entails. A shared point of frustration, highlighted in numerous negative reviews about Grow, is the absence of detailed feedback following the assessment. My rejection came with a boilerplate explanation: "We received a high number of applications, and unfortunately after reviewing your take home, we will not be moving forward with your application. While we would love to give feedback, our corporate policy states that we cannot provide feedback at this time." This approach feels dismissive of the considerable time and effort invested. If a company is too overwhelmed to critically review and provide feedback on candidates' assessments, why assign such a task in the first place? It would be more efficient and respectful to all involved to simply have candidates solve LeetCode problems (or something similar) instead, saving everyone's time.

The interviewers were great! Very friendly, and the interviews felt adequately challenging, not too hard or too easy. What made the process awful was the recruiter communication. I've been on an email thread with two recruiters and yet I still haven't gotten a response after doing 4 interviews. After I completed the first interview it took them 2 weeks to respond to me.