Digital Harbor Interview Questions
& Process

This was one of the most unnecessary interview processes I've ever been through. I went through 2 rounds of HR interviews and 2 technical interviews. The technical interviews didn't really ask technical questions, more like situational ones. There was also a soft skills interview and some psychological tests pending, but then I just got a super generic rejection. They denied giving feedback when I asked. It seems like they don't know what they want, especially considering the role has been reposted for over a month and judging by Glassdoor, leadership is indecisive.

First there was an aptitude test which included logical and arithmetic problems. Then there were tests for scenarios and test cases, including function integration and system test cases. After that, I had to complete a Java programming test where I had to reverse a string and find the length of an array. I also had a SQL test covering subqueries and joins. Following this, there were two technical rounds, Technical 1 and Technical 2, and finally, a final round.

So I had this 3rd party developer skill assessment thing. It had three parts: brainstorming solutions, code assessment, and debug assessment. The first two parts were easy peasy, but the last part was a mess - super confusing and the scenario was set up terribly. Despite that, I managed to come up with some solutions for the third part. My feedback on the first two parts was spotless, no negative comments or suggestions for improvement. Only the third part had some points for improvement. Oh, and the salary range was a bait and switch. The job posting said 120K - 145K, but the interview email listed it as 100K - 130K. After the skill assessment and getting great feedback, Digital Harbor decided not to move forward. If they had, it would have included an interview with an engineering director and then a culture fit interview. This also would have led to a background check and offer.

After one day, I got a response and was sent an assessment. It was a 90-minute test to evaluate UX principles and front-end coding. The second half of the assessment's purpose was unclear to me. The first half was great, allowing me to propose usability solutions. However, the second half involved fixing code errors. I felt it was more objective than subjective. They judged my UX suggestions against others and chose what they preferred. Honestly, it felt like a strange way for a third party to test a designer. The job description never mentioned needing a designer who could code. The test required fixing code. I really disagreed with this method of assessing a UXer's abilities. It felt like a waste of time!