think-cell Interview Questions
& Process

I spent over 5 hours on the take-home task, which I actually enjoyed solving. Even though I successfully ran and tested my submission locally, there was a small mistake in my code that made it incorrect. The issue is that besides the error log, I received no feedback on my submission, which I think is really important when asking someone to spend their evening on it. I emailed to ask for feedback, and their response explained common mistakes applicants make, none of which applied to my situation, leaving me confused. After some research, I figured out the problem myself, but I was really annoyed that companies ask candidates to dedicate a lot of time to assessments but aren't willing to give back the minimal time needed for valuable feedback. If someone is really interested, they might figure it out on their own if they save the page before submitting and keep a snapshot of the error, like I did. However, I don't like being treated as a number in someone's database and want my time to be respected. I won't re-apply, at least not without hesitation. I'm sure this company does good work, but I believe mutual respect is the foundation for collaboration, which Think-cell failed to establish with me.

I had a great time interviewing here. HR was super nice to start. Then I chatted with the Team Lead SEO, who was really chill. When I asked about tough technical stuff, the person managing it got back to me fast with good advice and clear answers. I also talked to the Software Engineer Responsible and the CTO at the end, which was cool. Even though I didn't get the job, I really liked the whole experience. It was all smooth and organized, and they kept me in the loop about what was happening and when. They let me know I didn't make it in a polite way, and I'm hoping to join them later.

The interview process was not great, the panelists should make the candidate more comfortable initially, but it felt really awkward for me because of how they responded to my answers. The interviewer should acknowledge the answers given by the candidate and correct them if they are wrong, instead of just laughing at half-answers and incorrect responses. Overall, I would rate it 3/10. I hope that in the future, the interviewers will adapt to the candidate. The company is growing, and I would appreciate it if the interviewers grew as well. The only feedback you get is laughter and them saying this would be your final round of interview.

Honestly, after dedicating so much effort to this test, the system's feedback was really lacking. I got two chances to submit a working solution, but there were four distinct parts to the process. I used my second try to fix the issues pointed out, but because I had no more attempts left for the next steps, I couldn't refine my code further. The job I was after wasn't even a senior role. How many people globally can even create this solution under such tight time constraints and with C++? And if there are some, why would they pick this company over giants like Google or Amazon? How can a company with fewer than 200 employees justify such a demanding hiring process, especially when offering just a standard salary? Perfection isn't realistic. Did the company itself manage to solve this within the given time and with poor feedback, yet they expect candidates to do so?