I applied for the position on 14 September 2026 and was interviewed on 23 September 2026. During the interview, I was informed that I would receive an update within a week. Since 5 October 2026, I have followed up multiple times regarding the status of my application, but as of today, 26 October 2026, I have not received any update. I believe candidates deserve clear communication and professional courtesy, regardless of the outcome of their applications. If anyone would like to verify this, please comment below. I can provide email correspondence as proof, with personal and confidential information appropriately redacted. I am sharing my experience to highlight the importance of timely communication throughout the recruitment process.

Not getting selected is obviously hard, but I genuinely appreciated how Voyfai handled the process. I had: → An initial screening round → A second interview with the Head of Engineering → A dedicated feedback session after the process What stood out to me was the feedback session. Instead of simply sending a standard rejection email, they took the time to speak with me face-to-face and honestly explain where I could improve. I also shared feedback with them about the hiring process. That kind of two-way conversation is something I really appreciate. Getting rejected isn't necessarily the worst outcome. Sometimes, knowing why you weren't selected can be much more valuable than receiving a generic “we decided to move forward with another candidate.” So, if you're considering applying to Voyfai, I'd say: go for it. Even if you don't get the role, you may walk away with useful feedback about your profile, interview performance, and areas you can improve.

Thank you so much for your interest in the [Role Title] role at ChapsVision, and for taking the time to apply. After careful consideration, we’ve decided to move forward with other candidates whose experience more closely aligns with our current needs. This was not an easy decision, as we received interest from many strong applicants. We truly appreciate your interest in ChapsVision and encourage you to keep an eye on future opportunities that may be a better fit. Wishing you all the best in your continued job search. Kind regards, Talent acquisition Specialist, Chapsvision

Extremely disappointing recruitment process I had a very disappointing experience with the recruitment process at Carbon Standards International. I applied for the Project Manager Software Development position in May. The process was already very slow, with several months passing before I was contacted again in August. At that point, the company asked whether I was still interested and specifically asked whether I would be willing to move away from software development and focus entirely on Project Management. I confirmed that I was interested and explained why my technical background was relevant to the role. I was then invited to a first-round interview. After the interview, I received an email from the Chief Software Officer on September 1 saying: I had a “great first interview” the first interview round was concluded only a “hand full of applicants” remained the next step would be round two of interviews they expected to proceed as soon as possible I was therefore under the reasonable impression that I had progressed in the recruitment process and that a second interview was forthcoming. Instead, on September 15, I was informed that the company had decided to fill the position with an internal candidate. I completely understand that companies want to support internal career development. What I find difficult to understand is why external candidates were taken through interviews and progressed toward a second round if the company ultimately intended to fill the position internally. If an internal candidate was already a serious option, external candidates should have been given more transparency about the situation. If the internal decision was made only later, then the company should have communicated that change much sooner rather than keeping candidates waiting after telling them they had progressed. The biggest issue for me is therefore not the rejection itself. It is the lack of transparency and the amount of time candidates are expected to invest in a process that can apparently be redirected toward an internal candidate at the very end. The process took several months, involved repeated delays and follow-ups, and ultimately left me feeling that my time as a candidate was not valued.

No, point in applying. You get rejected on Saturday. They are not checking resumes at all.

I recently had an interview for a Senior Software Engineer position at Enpal, and it was one of the most disappointing interview experiences I've had. The coding problem itself was reasonable, and I successfully implemented a solution that passed all the provided test cases. Throughout the interview, I explained my approach and reasoning. What made the experience frustrating was the communication. The interviewer explained the requirements in a very unclear way. I had to ask the same questions multiple times, but the responses remained vague and did not help clarify what was actually expected. Whenever I asked questions, I rarely received direct or useful answers, which made the interview unnecessarily difficult. After the interview, I did not receive any update and had to follow up myself. The response I eventually received was: "Unfortunately, the feedback indicates that the solution didn't fully meet the requirements needed to move forward to the next step. Therefore, we will not be proceeding with your application at this time." I completely respect being rejected. It is part of the hiring process. What I do not understand is how a solution that passed all the provided test cases, and was explained clearly during the interview, was considered to have not met the requirements when those requirements were never communicated clearly in the first place. Technical interviews should evaluate engineering skills through clear communication and well-defined expectations. Candidates should not be expected to guess hidden requirements. I hope companies continue improving the interview experience because communication is just as important as coding ability.

I applied to 2 positions on separate days but got a generic rejection today for both roles together. Which shows the resume was not even parsed or looked into by the recruiter. "We appreciate your interest in Distribusion Technologies and your time in applying for the Engineering Manager, Search Engine (all genders) position. Unfortunately, after careful consideration, we've decided to move forward with other candidates who more closely match our requirements for this role. Please note that the volume of applications we receive can be very high, and we often have to make difficult decisions with several amazing candidates. Sometimes, it can be small details that make the difference. Unfortunately, we cannot provide more detailed feedback at this time. As a growing company, new positions will continue to open, and we hope you will keep an eye out for other opportunities on our career site. We wish you all the best in your job search and professional endeavors." We appreciate your interest in Distribusion Technologies and your time in applying for the Engineering Team Lead, B2B Portal (all genders) position. Unfortunately, after careful consideration, we've decided to move forward with other candidates who more closely match our requirements for this role. Please note that the volume of applications we receive can be very high, and we often have to make difficult decisions with several amazing candidates. Sometimes, it can be small details that make the difference. Unfortunately, we cannot provide more detailed feedback at this time. As a growing company, new positions will continue to open, and we hope you will keep an eye out for other opportunities on our career site. We wish you all the best in your job search and professional endeavors.

I had an initial HR interview for the Senior Backend / Platform Engineer role. The conversation felt one-sided, with limited engagement or follow-up questions, making it difficult to understand how my experience was being evaluated. A few days later, I received a generic rejection email with no specific feedback. I reached out requesting detailed feedback but have not received any actionable insights.

No rejection reason was provided even after asking for it. "Thank you so much for taking the time to interview for the AI Full Stack Engineer role at Almedia. We truly appreciate your interest and effort in joining our team. After careful consideration, we have decided to move forward with other candidates whose experience is a closer match to the projects we are working on at the moment. We’ll be glad to reconnect and speak about future opportunities if our paths cross again. We wish you all the best in your search."

The recruiter shared the following feedback after reviewing the profile and product links with the telli hiring team: "Unfortunately, they are looking for more product-oriented people. This is something where telli has high bars for measuring." When asked for clarification and after sharing my working products as examples of product work, the recruiter responded: "I shared the links with them and they were not convinced." No further details were provided regarding technical skills, experience, or specific shortcomings. Summary: telli is looking for candidates they consider highly product-oriented. The hiring team reviewed the candidate's product links. - Which I don't think so, as i did not see the traffic. The hiring team was not convinced based on the information provided. No additional feedback or specific improvement areas were shared.

"Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us and for your interest in the Engineering Manager - Cards-as-a-Service API *remote* (m/f/d) role at Pliant. We truly appreciate the care, energy, and thought you brought to your application. It was a genuine pleasure getting to know you and learning more about your background and experiences. After careful reflection, we’ve made the decision to move forward with other candidates for this particular role. This wasn’t an easy call, as your qualifications stood out. It simply came down to finding the closest fit for the specific needs of the role at this moment in time."

I was given a CoderPad test upfront, without any prior HR round. Generally, I’m not a fan of technical assessments before speaking with HR, but in this case, there wasn’t an initial conversation. There were four questions in total. Most were fairly easy, except for one that I didn’t fully understand, though I still attempted it. Unfortunately, I was rejected after the assessment without any feedback. Overall, not a great experience.