First Technical Screen The first screen was not what I expected. The interviewer asked a few basic React definition questions, mostly about hooks, but it felt like they were reading directly from Google. They wanted very specific, almost textbook definitions, with little focus on real-world applications or problem-solving approaches. This made the interview feel more like a quiz on definitions rather than an evaluation of practical skills or experience. Pair Programming Challenge The real test came during the pair-programming challenge. The task itself was straightforward: I was asked to create a basic to-do list. The requirements were to input text in a field, print it in a div, and clear the input after submission. The next input would be added to a second div, and each item should have a remove button to delete it. However, instead of writing the code myself, I had to explain everything step by step while the interviewer typed in their WebStorm IDE. I also had to dictate the CSS styling verbally. The challenge didn’t test my coding skills or problem-solving approach. It was more about how well I could communicate each step and detail. This format felt very limiting. There was no opportunity to showcase how I actually approach problems, troubleshoot issues, or optimize my solutions in real-time. It felt like I was simply walking the interviewer through a very basic example without demonstrating my technical skills. Critique of the Process The interview ended about 15 minutes earlier than expected, which surprised me because I had completed the challenge. However, I believe the real issue on my end was that I critiqued the approach during the interview itself. I asked if it would be possible to use an online editor like CodeSandbox or CodePen to write the code myself, as that would allow me to better demonstrate my thought process and coding abilities. I sensed that this wasn’t well-received by the interviewer, which might have impacted the outcome. Final Thoughts Overall, the process at Finfare felt disconnected from evaluating real coding and problem-solving skills. The focus on dictating code during the pair-programming challenge felt artificial, and there was no opportunity to showcase how I think through and solve problems in a live coding environment. I would have preferred a more hands-on approach where I could demonstrate my skills rather than simply explaining them. "Don't waste your time applying here. The person taking interviews seems to have no knowledge about what to ask and how interview should be conducted."

Pretty straightforward process. Recruiter screen then a chat with the hiring manager. Tech screen then an onsite. I didn’t make it onto the onsite since I was told that I’m not senior enough for this role.