Ashby interview questions

The good: The people I spoke to throughout the process were bright, kind and passionate about Ashby. The initial recruiter screen was informative and pleasant - she gave me a lot to think about in terms of prepping for the interview process. The challenge itself was interesting and pushed me to think deeply about a real operational problem. The not so good: During my interview with the hiring manager, I was stopped mid-conversation and told that SQL proficiency was a requirement for the role — something that was never mentioned in the job description. I was honest about my experience level and they chose to move me forward anyway, with no explanation of how they were thinking about that gap. I then completed a project brief that required significant research and hours of work. After submitting, I waited two weeks with no update or timeline communicated. The rejection ultimately came from someone I had never spoken to, with language so generic it could have been sent to anyone. Not a single word of feedback despite the clear amount of effort put into the assignment. The rich irony here is difficult to ignore. Ashby exists to help companies create better hiring experiences for candidates. Their entire product is built on the premise that recruiting should be more organized, respectful, and efficient. It is genuinely surprising that a company selling that vision would surface a dealbreaker requirement mid-process, move a candidate forward anyway, ask for a substantial time investment, and then go silent for two weeks. I don't doubt that the team is talented and the product is strong. But there is something that other companies in the recruiting industry are doing better - and that is practicing what they preach when it comes to hiring.

I recently interviewed with Ashby and had a deeply disappointing experience with the recruiter I was paired with. When I asked a straightforward question about company culture, she responded by asking whether I had reviewed Ashby’s principles beforehand — then stated she wouldn’t “waste both of our time” going over that information. The only insight she offered was that Ashby is async and not meeting-heavy. Her tone was condescending and dismissive, and she became increasingly detached as the conversation continued. A reasonable question was met with defensiveness rather than genuine engagement. The rejection that followed was equally tone-deaf. Despite the recruiter providing little opportunity for meaningful dialogue during the interview, the feedback cited my communication and preparation as areas for improvement — a remarkable note coming from someone who declined to answer a basic culture question. If this interaction is any reflection of how Ashby treats candidates, I’d encourage others to go in with eyes open. Professionalism should be a two-way street.