The interview process at Zipmend started with an intelligence test before the in-person meeting. When I arrived at their office, I sat down with a panel of three people—the Head of Product Management, HR, and the CEO. They had a structured evaluation sheet in front of them, where they took notes on every answer I gave.
The questions were almost entirely about my past—starting from university and going through every job I’ve had, including why I left each one. They also asked what I liked and didn’t like about university, my hobbies, and other personal details. There were very few professional or skill-based questions—nothing really related to the role itself. The interview felt very structured but also somewhat draining, and it lasted two hours in total.
After the first hour with the panel, I spoke with a second group—employees from the company.
One strong impression I got is that Zipmend is very focused on financial performance. Even their mission seems to have money tracking built into it, and while efficiency is important, it made me wonder how that shapes the company culture. It also seemed like there was a cautious dynamic around the CEO—people were careful not to interrupt him and made sure to stay engaged when he spoke.
In the end, I was rejected based on personal fit, which I actually appreciated. It’s good to get a direct answer rather than vague feedback. If you’re comfortable with highly structured interviews that focus on personal history and general personality questions, this process will be easy. But if you’re expecting an in-depth conversation about skills or the actual job, you might leave with more questions than answers.
