First a written test that makes you edit AI-generated responses and analyse which AI responses to a prompt is better. Next is a HR call with someone from the Business Development team and the HR team.

I submitted my CV in early 2023, only to be contacted in Feb 2024 and tasked to complete a paper interview question the week before the Lunar New Year. I am ethnically Chinese, and ByteDance is known to be a Chinese-leaning company with Chinese values, and their doing so at this specific timing was already a faux pas in my book showing the lack of consideration towards candidates during this cultural season. I was also told that I would recieve a response 3-4 days from the submission of my paper test, only for them to not fulfil that timing and respond later. Further, not much was given in terms of parameters of what's to be expected of an ideal candidate in the role, and you are left blundering about re paper interview questions, not knowing if what you answered was an appropriate fit for the company/role. Given that AI solutions are still relatively immature in the industry, making candidates go through a strictly paper interview process first to qualify for in-person interviews does candidates a disservice, as not much was provided for candidates to better prepare and know how to deal with the interview process. Here's what I gave in my review of the interview process in their internal feedback review form: "No mention of what is expected in the questions, and of any goal. Also question information was clearly lifted from chatgpt which is the dominant and most used AI assistant application that is already known to be faulty. Basing questions on improving a commonly used mainstream ai whilst not also mentioning parameters for what ideal candidates should present in their answer is a disservice to all candidates given that widespread ai use is still new in the industry and that every company has different expectations of what they want to improve in their own AI solutions. Further, it would be more prudent for interviews to come after paper questions are answered if the option to include 'ideal parameters' will not be in the paper questions, so that candidates can have a fairer understanding of whether interest and skill align on both sides from there and then, and of personal compatibility, rather than wasting time on paper interviews as a way to sieve out paper-smart candidates first than a human fit."