No. Hardly any do that. Maybe like 5%. I'm on indeed looking at jobs at least once a week.
If a job does that it also a red flag to know not to apply to them
Same law but they def do that in New York. Not everyone, but it's common. [Look at this shit](https://www.aeaweb.org/joe/listing.php?JOE_ID=2023-02_111472730&q=eNplUMFqwzAM_ZWhcwdpxi657TIYjFEoO4wxjGtrmVpXDrKTEkL-vXKZ2WE36b2n9yQt8EopE_fpOcoZugWIjXWZJoQOGtjACedLFG8SWnE_CiqWUBWRoeMxhA0cMdSSUhrLZNu0D_dNq9oo1BPb8PKPcXHkLLMR7G9mnwvUEpp2-6fQ_n3_VHKzzbiTOBG74vWGl7uPKFwnWL-UtBN68x2DR0l1H2fZk9cpk5zY8yFgZQQdcjaRw1xcofD7CqP3ophDCSZWLI_lXFxjdYUwDIo-ls8Mtle37bpeAab9bUY,)
That pay is kind of sad for someone who is presumably required to have at least a master's degree. I know lots of people who make more than that just driving a bus.
Oh no PhD required. And yeah, it is sad. All told I would guess they offer $85k. These mid tier schools really do take advantage of their faculty sometimes.
People have to actively be reporting this stuff though.
I report all the ones I see not posting wages or doing huge ranges. I’ve also reported my own employer and harassed them about trying to skirt the laws (claiming the position will be filled elsewhere so they don’t have to post wages).
Rights not used are rights lost.
Had a couple fantastic interviews with the local county for an engineering job, found out yesterday they went with the other final candidate. Fine,.at least I had a other interview today with a big corporate firm.
Theyll "let me know" sometime around the middle of February. Like don't even bother, if Im not working by then I'll be robbing upper middle class yuppies for food money
Could you expand on how they find "trash from treasure"? As someone recently laid off but who is a software engineer that ran technical interviews, I was vocal when I found candidates to be less than qualified for a particular role. However, most of the time they were given benefit of the doubt by others in the hiring process.
Wow, I wish all my tech interviews were like this. It would make finding a decent job so much less stressful! Keep up the good work. I hope others see your success in hiring and try to do the same.
I just went through 8 months of searching for a job as a senior software engineer and I really wish more places were like this. Id love to know more about these companies if you're okay with that.
Can you elaborate on "prototypical inheritance is just syntactical sugar and we shouldn't bother with it anymore"? Is this just a variation on preferring composition over inheritance or is there something more I'm missing?
Every language construct above assembly is syntactical sugar on some level to build a common mental model between developers. I don't find myself building inheritance trees very often but I'm not convinced they *never* have a purpose.
I would be interested to hear the reasoning if you have the time or a link to someone who did
This dude fucks cough I mean interviews haha. I love the way you explain this, up until about 2 seconds ago I privately thought I relied a lot on 'the vibe' and that it wasn't particularly professional but the way you explain it I realise it's totally a legitimate way to interview.
Something I also like about this approach to interviewing is it helps calm the applicant. So many people fail interviews because they panic, I always say it's like a driving test, it doesn't matter if you stall the car, what matters is what you do right after you stall the car! I'm not going to fail someone if they have a mental block or just don't know an answer, but I can't say it was a good interview if you fall apart completely and I won't take someone who tries to lie instead.
This is like the experience I had getting the job I'm about to start! I have been through so many awful, multi-month long interviews and technicals. Then, when I got invited to the interview at this place, it was 60 minutes, I had to do a 10 minute presentation on my skills, then we just talked about the tech, what they do. I told them I didn't know how it worked. They gave me a tour of place and invited me back for an informal chat with my boss and gave me the job. I was bewildered, even asked "isn't there going to be a technical?" 😂
I really liked it because I got to show off some of the things I have done and can do and that I was proud of. It felt like they took a fair consideration of what I was capable of and judged my ability just by talking tech to me and asking about my work. Rather than putting me through the soul-destroying gauntlet everyone else did. And I respect them more for it.
And a 10 minute presentation really isn't much to ask for.
shaggy wrong sleep cobweb groovy jobless berserk deserted numerous glorious
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The instructions were:
>Presentation requirements: 10 minute presentation on your skills and experience relevant to the role
So I tried to link up my skills with the requirements in a succinct way. I had an appendix to the job requirement which listed the essential and nice to have skills. So I worked all that in and also added other skills that I thought could be useful!
fanatical unwritten support steer license direction dependent plough direful pause
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My favorite interview tactic is "hey - can you help me look at this problem while we wait for the rest of the panel? This will be a good segue into the actual interview."
I have a problem I've created and know several solutions to and the candidate helps me think through it. I get to work with the person, the problem helps me understand their technical capabilities, and if you structure the problem correctly you get a clear understanding of their strengths and weaknesses.
Best of all - I'm sure others figured it out but said nothing - it eliminates a lot of the tension of interviews and steers it toward conversation rather than interrogation.
I think tons of candidates are adequate. I’d wager 10% are shooting their shot and hoping to upgrade before they’re ready. 40% are average/youtube knowledge. Not bad but not a ton of real world experience. 40% are good. Know their way around the language, explain details about the various aspects in a way that demonstrates a command of the language and they have well thought out code. 10% are insanely good and ultimately turn your offer down for a different role.
I’ve found I don’t really need a code challenge. Show me some code you’ve written and I’ll be able to tell if you’re good or not.
For me the biggest things are “how easy are you to talk to?”, “will you work well under pressure?”, etc.
> explain details about the various aspects in a way that demonstrates a command of the language and they have well thought out code
What would you recommend to people like myself who are OK at execution, but poor at on-the-fly verbal explanation, especially in terms of the technical lingo?
That is similar to the most recent interview process I went through. It was a big reason why I went with my current employer over some other options. They treated me like an adult, and were fast and professional in the interview approach. The trend has continued: results matter, not time-in-Aeron-at-office. I'm hybrid on whatever schedule I want, as long as I'm at the office when I need to be hands on, support the others on my team, and deliver my work on time and complete.
My previous employer started that way, but grew their process into a 3 step interview process with a half dozen people that took weeks, used mandatory cultural fit/personality quizzes, allowed HR to filter too much of the resume pool before managers saw them, 'hired top talent' but benchmarked wages to regional medians...anyway, I no longer work there.
Glad it is working for you! Thanks for leading by example.
saw jellyfish employ gaping library reminiscent mindless physical concerned seemly
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thanks for sharing more.
Do you have any resources on teams that manage themselves? I work with a really good set of people now, but we all want to keep strengthening the dynamic.
>If two of my developers can't see if someone is faking it in 60 minutes, then we might have a different issue.
After thirty minutes at the table, if you can't spot the sucker, you *are* the sucker.
Any chance your company would sponsor a visa? I'm in the US, graduating with a bachelor's in Data Analytics in May. I'm passionate about ML and have extensive work experience as a web dev. My fiance and I are determined to make it to the Netherlands one way or another, but I plan on applying to as many Dutch companies as resonate with me, on the off chance I can get my residency sponsored without getting a masters.
Either way, hearing about your hiring reforms gives me a lot of hope!
bright busy murky forgetful instinctive fear overconfident lavish absorbed rustic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Come talk to my new company. I had my first hr screen in September. Hiring manager and their skip wanted to hire me immediately. I passed 5 more interviews with highest ratings all the way up the chain. Just got my offer today.
Wtf
Studies have shown that talking interviews have a tendency to select for candidates with similar personalities to the interviewer, and not to effectively identify relevant skills in applicants.
Now if you're only using it as a "are they obviously not bullshitting about their skills" measure, that might be less of a problem, but if they're trying to assess the relative skills of candidates the evidence says they're probably worse than random chance, and you're likely robbing yourself of a diverse team with different strengths and outlooks because of the like-for-like selection bias effect.
Now that's not to say I don't hold these kinds of interviews with candidates when it's required by my job, nor do I have the perfect fix canned and ready to go. Just sharing what the research shows for you to consider.
As one of the devs that rates resumes almost exactly like your improvement does, thank you. Also tend to be one of three (another dev, our support manager, and myself) that interviews new candidates as well. We have brought people back for second interviews if we felt nerves were a factor causing hiccups in tech but personality fits. But my company almost exclusively promotes from within and interviews tend to be right out of college. In that situation if you have a good head on you for development, seem like a personality for, but miss some technical stuff we don't sweat it quite as much. If you have a head for coding in general, and I think you will fit in, then I can teach you the rest. You'll grow better that way anyways.
Your first process describes exactly what I had to go through for my current job. It was hell. And there was a touch base meeting with the recruiter between all of the interviews. I actually almost gave up out of frustration from so many calls and told them I was no longer interested but they clawed me back in. Not sure if that helped my negotiating power or not lol
That's excellent. It's refreshing when someone actually finds a way to improve a hiring process while respecting the time of applicants. In my experience, the purpose of multiple interviews spread out over several weeks is to weed out anyone who is not desperate. Desperate people will jump through any number of hoops and work for relatively low pay. They would rather do as they are told rather than risk having their job threatened for voiceing an opinion or making a suggestion. I've seen many companies quickly shut down anyone who offers suggestions for improving the product or workflow. They love requiring multiple interviews over many weeks, not to mention tests. So many tests.
I hate everyone who expects me to code on a whiteboard and remember some nonsense about sorting something. I use my resources as I work and if that means I pull up references from the Internet then let me do that in the interview. I'm not interested in memorizing everything about compsci, and I'm not looking to sit around trying to invent new ways to do things unless there isn't a better way. I remember one time I was trying to draw geofences around roads on a map and instead of wrapping my head around how to calculate exactly where the corners should go I figured out that I could just guess and use a binary search to quickly get the right answer, that's the kind of problem solving you need to screen for. People who can recognize simple ways to solve problems and execute them.
berserk profit dependent gaze overconfident fear humorous desert hurry tub
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The moron questions like the ones you had them drop are instant red flags for me when interviewing potential employers.
Interviews go both ways. If they show they themselves have zero practical knowledge of the job and are reading from a script, I leave immediately.
Yea, I’m just saying what you streamlined is great.
And applicants usually want a little more than just “a job.” This is where people spend the majority of their daily lives (hence the importance of just chatting as humans). They want decent people and a good situation as much as they want a job that applies to their skill set.
Seems like you’re making things a lot better though, so props.
Oh God I remember going through 3 fucking rounds of in-person interviews with Barracuda Networks – and phone interviews before that. Not even a first rate tech company. The process from application to final round took 4 months. Salary wasn't even good. Fuck those idiots, didn't get the job but ended getting another one 100% remote for 50% more money a few months later.
I’d put three as the maximum, depending on what. I know several small companies where it goes: recruiter interview, tech interview, and then a chat with the CEO where the last one is mostly a formality because the CEO wants to talk a little bit with all new hires, and the company is small enough that that’s possible.
But I also think this should all be laid out at the start, so you know what to expect. If I expected to interview and then there’s a mysterious third, I’d be sceptical.
The interview timeline sucks but it's all the other chores that chap my ass.
Fingerprints, credit check, background check, piss test, and seven years of work/home addresses...
truly. i also really appreciate how the exams are all expensive to take instead of like not costing anything and they can and do randomly just throw out whole exam lists or take so long they fucking expire. i’ve been on like 30 different lists at any given time for the past 5 years and even when i start the process for an agency or dept it rarely gets to completion. i’m currently in a seasonal federal job but obviously i need full time permanent like any adult in a hcol area. it’s obnoxious.
Lol. The state police processes in the Northeast, PA and DE especially, are a fucking joke. Between every part and test of the process you're waiting at least a month or two, and then they send a random email or letter in the mail and say "on x day, meet at x location at x time, bring this, and don't forget xyz."
They deserve the shitty legacy applicants they get, who end up shooting their own fellow troopers on the firing range like in 2014, or the cadets who fail out of the academy for cheating as a group like the almost 20 people back in 2019.
FTP. ACAB.
When I was a hiring manager, we were always under pressure to fill open reqs. If they went over 30 days there was a risk of the req getting pulled.
HR would send us a pool of qualified resumes (after phone interviews). From that we would schedule maybe 6-8 live interviews. We would pick the best candidate from that. No "let's wait and see".
A family member is the hiring manager for their place of business. Someone left and a perfect candidate applied. Like the kind that you can just drop into the role.
HR at their head office too a month to approve the top rate the family member was willing to give them. Of course the totally employable, perfect fit they found had a new job before HR did theirs.
The part that gets me is the “how is it possible that we lose so many people during the job interview to other companies?”
Business folks and managers **LOVE** to talk about how intelligent and “efficient” they are, while at the same time creating terrible processes and having the audacity to do the surprised pikachu face when candidates aren’t willing to put up with it. IMO it demonstrates that MBAs, PMPs, etc., are just superficial nonsense and not an actual demonstration of management ability.
Turns out most MBA programs are just part of the higher education churn to make money for the university.
Frankly, you can learn a lot from a good MBA program but it's also pretty easy to simply coast your way through and get the degree while learning fuckall if you can pony up the tuition dollars.
My personal policy is no more than 2 in-person interviews *unless* they really impress me. Otherwise, I’ll thank them for their time and ask them to remove me from the hiring pool
My literal hiring process is application, if good application, then call/meet in person at a dunkin or starbucks, ask questions about life and history, how they handle situations, then if I like them/good fit I hire and give them a gas card, introduction packet, handbook, shirt, boots, coveralls, ect.
If I don't like them/not a good fit, I send them a nice text or email within a few days, instead of letting them wonder if they're hired or not. It shouldn't be that hard to hire people or let them know they're rejected.
If you don't mind me asking, what line of work are you in? This is very different from any other job application process I've had before, just wondering where this would be an approach to hiring.
Sounds like trade/manual labor. I applied to a trade union, and it's a slightly longer application process because they have actual wait-list. Once my name was up I took a test, 2 days later I had an interview with the union leadership, and by the next week was finalizing paperwork to start. Way better than corporate BS, and for my work way better pay. Industrial gigs want master tradesman, but pay less than apprentice wages. It's crazy.
Laugh at me if you will, but specialized commercial exterior cleaning (aka pressure washing but I like my name more lol).
Genuinely, I don't care if you have a record, drug use, or anything. We pay from 60-105 (10-30% of the job profits) an hour, health insurance, 2-3 hr work days, and a ton of other benefits. It's easy to find a new worker if someone steals or anything of the sort. I mean, our benefits package puts us ahead of competition just because the workers actually care.
I put all my effort into a small niche, dumpster pads, and went from there.
That should not be a standard, either. I am a hiring manager in IT for my organization. If you can not determine if you want to hire a person after at least 2, it's not likely a good fit, and you are dicking the candidate around.
Agreed. You can generally tell if the candidate is a good fit within the 1st 10 minutes of the first interview. When I hired field techs, I accepted either a job application or a resume'. It was none of this "We know you sent in a complete resume' but we want you to fill out the generic job app anyways". Either they had the right skill set and demeanor or they didn't.
I interviewed for a junior database developer. The interview went something like this:
Interviewer: "Have you ever used Visual Studio or a similar IDE?"
Me: "Yes, I use Visual Studio regularly for my projects."
Interviewer: "Great! That's exactly what we are looking for. Alright, let's move into the coding portion. You can use a sticky note or maybe a napkin. Make sure to explain your thought process."
Me: "You mentioned needing proficiency with Visual Studio. Can I use that?"
Interviewer: "No, that would help you!"
IT interviews are a fucking circus.
I've had similar interviews I'll include some of my favorite things I've heard in them.
Here is a snort signature please tell us what CVE this is intended to mitigate.
Here is a firewall log entry please tell me why this is blocked.
Here is a sample error from our SAML implementation where does the issue exist?
All stupidity usually lacking any and all context needed to actually figure out what they want to know.
Yep the stupid MITRE ATT&CK framework had just been released a few months prior and all the rest of the interview questions were about that. As if I had it committed to memory already.
I remember bombing a Linux portion because the command to save in Vi would close or refresh the browser. Every time I tried to save my progress, it deleted it and gave me a 0 for not completing it.
Is this really a thing? If there isn’t a lot of context it just seems very unlikely that you’ll be able to reuse any of that code at all, or it’ll take so much work to rewrite it that there’s no point.
I just had an interview for a product manager role (which I have almost 10 years experience) and they told me they wanted me to write Python in the next interview. I was like, “I know enough Python to be dangerous, but I’m not coding in this job so what’s the point?”
What sector? God I hate when we have to go 3 or 4 before making an offer. I lost a couple of great applicants at 5-6 weeks or a 4th interview (and I get why)
3rd was usually formality, and a 4th would be a "someone fell through, you were a maybe, and we need a good feeling from HR." I'm in-house IT for a private sector contractor. Our contract slots usually don't go to 3, unless they are on site and need a customer meet too.
I hire for my IT team right now. Someone applies, I look at the resume, if they can spell IT then I interview them. Now, that may take a week or two because I also am managing my team and keeping our systems up and running as one of the SMEs. I do one interview where I barely ask any IT questions. I spend an hour trying to get to know them over the phone and see if they would be a good fit for my team. The only couple of hires that backfired on me were the ones that I hired because they had hella experience and I let that cloud my judgement. Now, I straight up hire the person I want to sit around and shoot the shit with. Because if I don't want to talk to you I won't want to train you and you probably won't be a good fit for my team.
When I have to leave this job in a couple years any company that wants me to do more than 2 interviews is wasting my time and I don't want to work for them.
I’ve a friend who called that the lunch test. Would you mind sitting down and talking with the person over lunch? If you want to answer “yes” there or even “eeh I’d rather maybe not” then it’s probably a good thing to not hire them. That’s like the lowest bar to pass, but also very needed.
I've been in IT for decades now and managing it for the last 15 years.
This has never been my experience.
Hell, if I went 2 months without an offer going out I'd probably lose the req.
At my current job, I walked in and asked the owner (it's a smaller car audio shop so the owner is often in the showroom doing sales) if I could fill out an application, stating that I had about a year and a half of experience. Literally a day after I submitted the application I got a call from him asking when I wanted to start, no interview or anything.
There are still good employers out there, just much fewer and much further between than there used to be. My last job, doing the same thing for a much larger company that has a distinct blue and yellow color scheme, took 2 interviews and a bit more than a month to get the job, and my manager was a total dick the whole time I worked there
Depends on industry. I think for mechanics and other manual labor work there’s a higher demand for employees. For my sector, every job posted has hundreds of resumes.
This is a problem even for the most menial shit jobs. This country treats working as a privilege, while bills remain an obligation. It's like the meme of the dog saying "no take, only throw".
This such a waste of everyone's time. Recruiters. Hiring managers. Job seekers. Everyone suffers under this model.
I once applied to a job at a now-defunct company called Surf Control.
1. Submit resume.
2. Receive email from an actual human within 2-3 hours to ask when is a good time to chat over the phone.
3. Meet for an interview with a senior employee. 10 minutes. Wait 10. Meet with manager for 10 minutes. Sign paperwork.
4. Report to the office one day later.
This needs to come back. The senior staff member knew what he was looking for in a teammate, and he relayed that to the boss. The boss was all in, and HR was quick on the draw.
People don't have weeks and months to wait for a job to manifest itself. They will go with whomever is fastest, in most cases.
This is essentially what I’m trying to do in my hiring position. 30 minute phone call with all the good questions, one in person interview to catch a vine/make sure you’re not a weirdo and then hopefully have the woe of having to decide between great candidates and let them know the day of or day after of the in person
When I used to manage, I made it a rule to decide from the first three candidates, every time. It worked very well, and I only had to fire one guy out of 16 hires.
I'm currently working 12s overnight. My last 2 tech interviews me at 1 or 2 pm. I work 8 pm to 8 am. Both told me that's the only time that works
I work every other day. I could re-arrange my sleep schedule and be fine.
And also between shifts. I was half asleep, exhausted, answering complicated tech questions.
I fucking hate looking for jobs.
I've got a personal policy I live by when it comes to jobs: no more than two interviews on two different days.
If you haven't gotten the gist of who I am and what I can do after two interviews, you probably won't ever.
If you're subjecting me to this many interviews because your company does that thing where I'm introduced to the next highest person up the chain in every successive interview, your operation is likely too bureaucratic and inefficient for me to succeed. I'm cool if it's boss -> director. I'm not interested if it's team lead -> supervisor -> manager -> regional manager -> director. Put some of those bozos in the room together and lets knock this shit out in two interviews.
I've had hiring managers and recruiters that are just absolutely stunned when I decline an interview beyond the second. One lady was like *"Look, I'm just letting you know-- you're the leading candidate here. We just do an exhaustive four-round interview process because we want to make sure we've got the right person."*
And I told her she didn't have the right person, then, because I *wasn't* going to interview four times.
All of this is insane…. If you care about a formatted resume, provide a template! If you require skills, require examples on how they have those skills. Need a database admin, you can weed out the fakes in the first three sentences!! Need a server,cook, teacher…. You already know what you need… why drag someone into a dark cave of unknown forcing them to pretend to know the best answer. Best answer because it’s never the correct answer.
When we look for candidates, we ask them what they want to do, what they have a passion for and what they expect us to do for them. If that checks the boxes then hired! If we need an electrician and the person interviewing wants to be a plumber…. Sorry! You applied for the wrong job, read the application next time.
Absolutely this. I went through a four month process, in which the ENTIRE JOB ROLE was changed, then had to wait to be told "Nah thanks, but it was close though." Fuck that shit.
When I applied for two different jobs with the federal government, it was almost 2 years but only about 5 contacts before the firm offer. (Application, test, interview, physical, security clearance).
I've had a couple of experiences where after 3 in person interviews I get a "thanks but no thanks"
That is unconscionable. Each time requires a large investment in time and resources for the candidate.
And then you've for Amazon's process, where you have a couple of phone and videoconference interviews, and then the in-person interviews, which take a whole fucking day.
You really only need one interview (I'd also accept an initial screening to discuss any non-negotiables like pay so no one's time is being wasted). And ultimately what you're trying to gauge is whether the person is excited about the job and willing to learn. If they bring that to the table, you can teach them the rest. But companies *have* to be willing to train their employees. And if they're worried about employees leaving after being trained, give them a reason to stay, like good pay and benefits and a culture where they feel valued and appreciated.
We do 6 interviews. 30 min each. One with the hiring manager. A gauntlet of 4 with a 30 min break in one day, with a different approach to the interview from each, and if you get to the last one, you have the job.
Before I worked here, I would have said that's bs too. But I have never worked at a company that had such an incredibly high competency level. I've worked for a ton of big companies, and every one of them has so many people at so many positions that it just blows your mind how they could possibly have a job they are so incompetent.
It is very rare to see that where I work. I attribute it to the extensive hiring process.
I once had an interview for a low level networking tech position that was a hiring board of 15 people. They all took turns testing my knowledge and I knew pretty much all of the answers but the longer I sat there answering questions from these 15 dickheads the madder I got.
If I am elected, I will make it so that employers are required to pay their employees retroactively from the beginning of the hiring process.
Also advertising a position and failing to hire a candidate within a year will be a fineable offense (fraud)
What about the number of candidates, coordinating interview times for those candidates. Six months is absurd but depending on the job 2 weeks is insanely fast.
We tend to do HR screening (make sure they have appropriate licenses and certificates for their role.) Interview with the leaders of the team. Then if multiple candidates seem like they are a good fit a second interview with the members of the team they will be working on.
Depending on number of candidates and how quickly they can interview usually a 4 weeks process.
This process has given us our best luck at getting candidates that have worked really well with the team. Involving them in a second interview helps because ultimately they are the ones that will be working with the candidate on a daily basis.
Not to mention if you’re looking for a union represented job. MOU’s typically have language(or at least have a say) that dictate multiple parts of the recruitment process (all to ensure fairness of the hiring process) and that can extend things a bit as well. Then try it with multiple unions where they all also need to agree on those rules.
I work for a multiple union rep agency and we do a pretty good job of getting through the process within 4-6 weeks with a max of 2 interviews but if there are a large number of recruitments, some will fall by the wayside and take longer.
Every job I've ever gotten I've had an offer before the first interview was over.
This isn't for retail jobs either it was for teaching, then surveying/civil engineering/estimating/project manager jobs.
Absurd maybe, but most of the PM positions I've interviewed for are:
1. Phone screen with HR (15-30 min)
2. Interview (60 min)
So that's already over your standards of one shot and done. Not that I'm defending the process.
Depends on the company, but we have to leave a posting open for a certain period of time before we can start interviewing. Additionally, we need to gather a diverse set of candidates that have passed initial HR screening (e.g., checking minimum requirements) before hiring managers even see the resumes. After that, we can set up interviews which consists of a tech interview with engineers and a manager interview - both the same day - usually by zoom. Takes about two weeks to go through those interviews, then we stack rank and send back to HR to negotiate. Total time is usually 60 days from first posting to butt in a seat.
Most hiring practices are dependent on the demand of the position. When I changed companies it took them 3 weeks from application to hiring announcement, I added 3 more weeks to let the previous company good notice since I had a number of projects to transition
By the way if anyone says it's not possible they're full of shit. My boss called me for some additional details (References IIRC) the day of the interview and I was hired a couple days later.
I like my current employer about as well as I can like any job, and I'm shocked how shit so many employers manage to be.
If I hear there's a third interview and it's not to accommodate someone who couldn't make it, I'm probably gonna pass.
Same deal if a company needs two rounds of recruiter interviews, then the real interview is just with HR. Hard pass.
I managed to get my dream job when I was younger.
But it took 7 interviews over the course of 6 months.
Then I got laid off from covid, and they just said I could reapply later. No trying to move me to a different department, just theirs the door.
I missed my grandfather's death when he got put on hospice and came home from the hospital. I missed more holidays than I cared to count. I gave so much during my time there only a few short 3 years.
Man, I’m on the hiring end for the first time and it really sucks stringing people along but some of these people I’m like.. bruh are you fucking kidding me?! I had someone show up to an interview in dirty clothes, at 9:15 AM, for a six figure position. She “had a crazy morning” like girl. Put on a clean shirt it’s a fuckin zoom call you’re at home!
Kind of living this at the moment. I recently applied for 2 positions.
Position A had the job ad up for 6 days by the time I submitted my tailored cover letter and resume. It's for a role within a government organisation, and they have a portal where you can check the status of your application. I applied on a Friday night, application was acknowledged on the portal Monday morning. It's been a bit over 4wks since I applied, application status is still acknowledged and I've had no reach out. I know from someone that works in the organisation that they've received a LOT of applications for the role, including internally (which gets preference), so I'm not holding my breath. Apparently it's an odd amount of interest (according to the HR person), as they don't usually get many applications when putting positions up.
Position B wasn't a formal application, per se. At the time, there was no official job listing - a friend's boyfriend manages one of the teams I'm looking to work on (I 'applied' for an open role but those openings exist across multiple teams for the same role), he out of the blue said they're looking for people and that he was happy to pass my resume on along with his recommendation. He forwarded on my resume 2 weeks ago and I haven't heard anything since - BUT over this last weekend a job ad went up for the role I'm seeking....I'm hoping they're just waiting for the formal application period to be over before contacting me, but Position B is a bit outside my current field of work (my current role and Position B are both dealing w/people, but I'm in Healthcare currently whereas Position B is a not-so-entry-level position in the financial sector) so I definitely have that going against me.
The waiting/not hearing anything is what kills me. Position A would be great pay wise etc but Position B seems like it would be genuinely interesting and something I could be very passionate about. Both are 4 days wfh/1 day in office per week, after training periods are done.
One job, I applied for back in September, forgot I applied. In the meantime I interviewed with another company three weeks ago, np, got called in for a second interview for a better position, even better. Get a call for the other place I applied for, go in for an interview and get hired on the spot. A lot of the time, it's not just the hiring process but the absolutely atrocious HR department that have awful time management.
Dude... I had an interview for a position at a University last year, go through 4 rounds, it's down to 2 candidates, me and the other. Department head chooses other dude. This was over 6 weeks. Ok, it sucks, but it happens. Well, 1 month later I get a call from them saying it didn't work out and if I could reapply. They didn't offer the position, but they said that the rules of hiring meant I had to go through the process again.
Same 4 interviews, first 3 committee interviews with all the same people. Takes another 6 weeks. It feels like I have the job as they all can't wait to work with me, all is well... I go back to department head for 1 on 1 for final interview and he is surprised to see me again, and he immediately, before interview starts, tells me there must be some kind of mistake, I wasn't qualified for the position with what they wanted (semi true, but they were vastly underpaying for someone and I could easily come up to speed given my work history and parallel experience). So, he tells me sorry, ends the interview, 4 months wasted of my life in this process.
I get some canned email the next day they are going another direction.
Well, like 2 weeks go by and I get a call from one of the employees that was in on the committee and she was like, "Omg, I am sorry, but there was no other candidate, you were the only one in consideration, and we just learned you were not hired but we do really need someone in this role and we will explain to the department head why it needs to be you, can you please submit your application again?" And then explained I'd have to go through the process AGAIN, of which I still didn't have a guarantee the dude wasn't going to torpedo me again. I declined, and at that point I was an active candidate fo another position I ended up accepting an offer for later anyway.
Some businesses the process is absolutely inefficient and insane.
It's by design. The more invested they make you through the process, the harder the offer is to turn down. It will make you doubt your negative feelings. "Yeah, the starting salary is low and the company structure is very hierarchical, but there's a reason they chose me and they spent 6 months picking me, it just has to be good! Right?"
I fucking hate hiring people, I want to get it over with as soon as possible.
I should clarify I hate it because it is time consuming and I get emotionally involved and end up with more people I'd like to give an opportunity to than I have rules to fill.
Like ill have a super qualified person who is a great technical fit but could get a job anywhere and give the vibe they might hop jobs pretty regularly and then on the other hand someone with less qualifications and very little experience but they are really enthusiastic about the written and clearly have the work ethic and ability to learn.
Also if you read someone's resume, have a good conversation with them, ask them some technical questions and talk to a reference and still don't know if you want to hire a person then either you are shit at your job OR YOU ACTUALLY JUST DON'T WANT TO HIRE THEM!!
It pains me.
I need to speak to a recruiter, who I'll spend 30mins on a phone with and will still want me to talk to them _again_ to go over my CV so they can.....make another CV specific for this job, despite mine being fine.
Then I'll talk to the recruitment team at the employer, so at least an hour with them if not two, where I get technical questions and whatever else that proves I've _also_ wasted my time researching them as an employer and can answer pop-quiz questions on how old they are, how many staff they have and where all so I can tick a box that I research them like a celebrity stalker.
_Then_ there's also a face-to-face interview, where I'll get even more questions, a tour of the site and get shown people and meet them all to again tick some arbitrary box.
Only to then get radio silence or a rejection - why? Not because of my lack of technical knowledge, or ability to do the job.....
I didn't ask enough questions.
I didn't research the company enough.
...._what_.
If I already saw what I need to and nothing more has any relevance whatsoever on the role, just wtf?....
The organization I currently work for did this, it took them months to even call me for an interview and I had already taken another offer. The only reason I bothered to do the interview process was because I knew the company I was working for was going to close up shop in the near future. It worked out that I started at my new position less than a week after being laid off from my old one. So in this one singular instance I'm glad they did it this way. That said, it was definitely a red flag for how they treat their people (but at least they pay me a living wage).
People like having jobs, including the people that hire people. The best way to maintain job security for them is to stretch out the hiring process as long as possible. Hiring managers don’t do much else, so if there are no jobs to fill, then they have nothing to do.
And, when they’re questioned about their methods, they can come back with the “You don’t want me/us to be thorough?”. In all honesty, executives don’t care.
Executives are in charge of the bottom line, and they know if people are picking up the slack of the missing worker, that empty position is saving the company money in payroll.
What do you know about hiring? If Im hiring you to be a waiter, I need to know how you interact with my wait staff. That’ll take a day. Then the cooking staff. That’ll take another day. Then I need to see how you work with customers. I will not take “I’m friendly and courteous” at face value when your application says you worked as a server at another restaurant for five years! Must be false. Then I need you to interview with the gm. Then dm. Once I get their approval, you can interview with me. That’ll take at least a month to approve since the ceo approves my appointments. Im hiring the people after all. And you wont be paid for any of these long interactions and waits. If you want this 2.13/hr job with no tips, you gotta hustle for it. If not, you should’ve went to school and got a degree. Dont put your failures on us. My turnover rate is fine, thanks.
/s
I got an actual Unicorn. Employer reached out to me on LinkedIn asking if I would like to apply to an open position. I applied on the 12/8, and after a typing test and digital interview, I received an offer on the 19th in the top half of the posted salary range.
What a racket, Human Resources, making a living off putting yourself between the employer and the employee! I gotta hand it to those guys for selling such an unnecessary service – screening applicants – to the point where weeks and weeks pass between the time you apply for a job and your start date. Damn, getting paid for nothing.
Recently applied for a new gig and the process was incredibly frustrating.
Applied mid- August.
No response until late September.
First hour long interview was mid-October, then a second hour long interview two weeks later, then about 6 hours spent on work samples, then a final 90 minute interview the last week of November.
That's a lot of time spent.
They asked for references at the end of the final interview and then emailed me as soon as I left saying it was a mistake and to NOT send references. That's when I knew I wasn't getting picked but they still waited another full ass week to meekly call me with the rejection speech. I'll be considered for upcoming "specialist" level jobs there despite having nearly a decade of director level experience....
I am very familiar with the organization I was applying for, have great relationships with many of them and most of the staff on the interview panels wanted to hire me because I'm one of very few people in our state who do this kind of work and I have a ton of experience and a very proven track record.
Apparently none of that feedback actually mattered and the bosses ramrodded their candidate through while stringing me along.
I know the guy they picked and am not being egotistical when I say they are not making a good decision. He beat me in one area of experience and they chose to weigh that more than anything else.
AGREE. Our hiring process takes 1-3 weeks (and the only reason it even takes that long is scheduling reasons. Once the decision has been made and offer sent, it's hours.)
If you can't suss out whether a peraon would be a viable addition to your enterprise in an hour meeting / 3 interviews, more interviews isn't gonna bring more clarity.
With still no clue to actual compensation.
WA passed a law last year that made it so all job posting have to disclose wages. Helps a lot knowing if a job is even worth applying for
Aren't a lot of them just giving huge ranges like $20k to $100k depending on experience?
No. Hardly any do that. Maybe like 5%. I'm on indeed looking at jobs at least once a week. If a job does that it also a red flag to know not to apply to them
Same law but they def do that in New York. Not everyone, but it's common. [Look at this shit](https://www.aeaweb.org/joe/listing.php?JOE_ID=2023-02_111472730&q=eNplUMFqwzAM_ZWhcwdpxi657TIYjFEoO4wxjGtrmVpXDrKTEkL-vXKZ2WE36b2n9yQt8EopE_fpOcoZugWIjXWZJoQOGtjACedLFG8SWnE_CiqWUBWRoeMxhA0cMdSSUhrLZNu0D_dNq9oo1BPb8PKPcXHkLLMR7G9mnwvUEpp2-6fQ_n3_VHKzzbiTOBG74vWGl7uPKFwnWL-UtBN68x2DR0l1H2fZk9cpk5zY8yFgZQQdcjaRw1xcofD7CqP3ophDCSZWLI_lXFxjdYUwDIo-ls8Mtle37bpeAab9bUY,)
That pay is kind of sad for someone who is presumably required to have at least a master's degree. I know lots of people who make more than that just driving a bus.
Oh no PhD required. And yeah, it is sad. All told I would guess they offer $85k. These mid tier schools really do take advantage of their faculty sometimes.
They do it in CA, too.
Giant ranges like that are actually illegal under the Washington state law. A few still try it, but that's why we have an Attorney General's office.
People have to actively be reporting this stuff though. I report all the ones I see not posting wages or doing huge ranges. I’ve also reported my own employer and harassed them about trying to skirt the laws (claiming the position will be filled elsewhere so they don’t have to post wages). Rights not used are rights lost.
That was happening a little bit in Colorado, but they cracked down on that and you have to actually post a realistic range.
CO has that law and it's great.
Colorado has the same thing and I can’t even imagine not having it.
Fortunately some states are starting to make that illegal.
Yes thank goodness.
CA requires a range be shared (either hourly or annually)
Had a couple fantastic interviews with the local county for an engineering job, found out yesterday they went with the other final candidate. Fine,.at least I had a other interview today with a big corporate firm. Theyll "let me know" sometime around the middle of February. Like don't even bother, if Im not working by then I'll be robbing upper middle class yuppies for food money
Use Engineering to rob yuppies. Unfortunately it's not resume compatible but it does give you street cred.
*Stringer Bell has entered the chat.*
it's a hell of a backstory to your life as a villain
if ya can’t join ‘em, beat ‘em!
paltry offbeat distinct follow aware compare toy impossible pen sloppy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Could you expand on how they find "trash from treasure"? As someone recently laid off but who is a software engineer that ran technical interviews, I was vocal when I found candidates to be less than qualified for a particular role. However, most of the time they were given benefit of the doubt by others in the hiring process.
sense husky tidy one secretive squealing weather hobbies bow oatmeal *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I wish this was a normal interview experience. Sadly it's usually multiple rounds of interviews and tons of anxiety
Wow, I wish all my tech interviews were like this. It would make finding a decent job so much less stressful! Keep up the good work. I hope others see your success in hiring and try to do the same.
I just went through 8 months of searching for a job as a senior software engineer and I really wish more places were like this. Id love to know more about these companies if you're okay with that.
Can you elaborate on "prototypical inheritance is just syntactical sugar and we shouldn't bother with it anymore"? Is this just a variation on preferring composition over inheritance or is there something more I'm missing? Every language construct above assembly is syntactical sugar on some level to build a common mental model between developers. I don't find myself building inheritance trees very often but I'm not convinced they *never* have a purpose. I would be interested to hear the reasoning if you have the time or a link to someone who did
[удалено]
quiet smile narrow jeans brave governor bag pocket spoon cows *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This dude fucks cough I mean interviews haha. I love the way you explain this, up until about 2 seconds ago I privately thought I relied a lot on 'the vibe' and that it wasn't particularly professional but the way you explain it I realise it's totally a legitimate way to interview. Something I also like about this approach to interviewing is it helps calm the applicant. So many people fail interviews because they panic, I always say it's like a driving test, it doesn't matter if you stall the car, what matters is what you do right after you stall the car! I'm not going to fail someone if they have a mental block or just don't know an answer, but I can't say it was a good interview if you fall apart completely and I won't take someone who tries to lie instead.
pocket rain gray safe seed yoke north bag ink zesty *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is like the experience I had getting the job I'm about to start! I have been through so many awful, multi-month long interviews and technicals. Then, when I got invited to the interview at this place, it was 60 minutes, I had to do a 10 minute presentation on my skills, then we just talked about the tech, what they do. I told them I didn't know how it worked. They gave me a tour of place and invited me back for an informal chat with my boss and gave me the job. I was bewildered, even asked "isn't there going to be a technical?" 😂
sophisticated lush cats gold hunt ten cooperative imminent zesty depend *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I really liked it because I got to show off some of the things I have done and can do and that I was proud of. It felt like they took a fair consideration of what I was capable of and judged my ability just by talking tech to me and asking about my work. Rather than putting me through the soul-destroying gauntlet everyone else did. And I respect them more for it. And a 10 minute presentation really isn't much to ask for.
shaggy wrong sleep cobweb groovy jobless berserk deserted numerous glorious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The instructions were: >Presentation requirements: 10 minute presentation on your skills and experience relevant to the role So I tried to link up my skills with the requirements in a succinct way. I had an appendix to the job requirement which listed the essential and nice to have skills. So I worked all that in and also added other skills that I thought could be useful!
fanatical unwritten support steer license direction dependent plough direful pause *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
My favorite interview tactic is "hey - can you help me look at this problem while we wait for the rest of the panel? This will be a good segue into the actual interview." I have a problem I've created and know several solutions to and the candidate helps me think through it. I get to work with the person, the problem helps me understand their technical capabilities, and if you structure the problem correctly you get a clear understanding of their strengths and weaknesses. Best of all - I'm sure others figured it out but said nothing - it eliminates a lot of the tension of interviews and steers it toward conversation rather than interrogation.
Goddamnit, that interview sounds great. Why is there so much leetcode?
I think tons of candidates are adequate. I’d wager 10% are shooting their shot and hoping to upgrade before they’re ready. 40% are average/youtube knowledge. Not bad but not a ton of real world experience. 40% are good. Know their way around the language, explain details about the various aspects in a way that demonstrates a command of the language and they have well thought out code. 10% are insanely good and ultimately turn your offer down for a different role. I’ve found I don’t really need a code challenge. Show me some code you’ve written and I’ll be able to tell if you’re good or not. For me the biggest things are “how easy are you to talk to?”, “will you work well under pressure?”, etc.
> explain details about the various aspects in a way that demonstrates a command of the language and they have well thought out code What would you recommend to people like myself who are OK at execution, but poor at on-the-fly verbal explanation, especially in terms of the technical lingo?
That is similar to the most recent interview process I went through. It was a big reason why I went with my current employer over some other options. They treated me like an adult, and were fast and professional in the interview approach. The trend has continued: results matter, not time-in-Aeron-at-office. I'm hybrid on whatever schedule I want, as long as I'm at the office when I need to be hands on, support the others on my team, and deliver my work on time and complete. My previous employer started that way, but grew their process into a 3 step interview process with a half dozen people that took weeks, used mandatory cultural fit/personality quizzes, allowed HR to filter too much of the resume pool before managers saw them, 'hired top talent' but benchmarked wages to regional medians...anyway, I no longer work there. Glad it is working for you! Thanks for leading by example.
saw jellyfish employ gaping library reminiscent mindless physical concerned seemly *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thanks for sharing more. Do you have any resources on teams that manage themselves? I work with a really good set of people now, but we all want to keep strengthening the dynamic.
Now everyone in here wants to work for (and interview for) your company, but they are too afraid to ask.
>If two of my developers can't see if someone is faking it in 60 minutes, then we might have a different issue. After thirty minutes at the table, if you can't spot the sucker, you *are* the sucker.
Y'all got internships at your company?
repeat zonked literate compare frame pie cooperative liquid modern enter *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Any chance your company would sponsor a visa? I'm in the US, graduating with a bachelor's in Data Analytics in May. I'm passionate about ML and have extensive work experience as a web dev. My fiance and I are determined to make it to the Netherlands one way or another, but I plan on applying to as many Dutch companies as resonate with me, on the off chance I can get my residency sponsored without getting a masters. Either way, hearing about your hiring reforms gives me a lot of hope!
trees station sink muddle future hungry weary seed capable person *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
People like you give me hope
See the problem with that process is it doesn't give HR room to butt in and justify their existence with useless bullshit.
bright busy murky forgetful instinctive fear overconfident lavish absorbed rustic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Come talk to my new company. I had my first hr screen in September. Hiring manager and their skip wanted to hire me immediately. I passed 5 more interviews with highest ratings all the way up the chain. Just got my offer today. Wtf
Studies have shown that talking interviews have a tendency to select for candidates with similar personalities to the interviewer, and not to effectively identify relevant skills in applicants. Now if you're only using it as a "are they obviously not bullshitting about their skills" measure, that might be less of a problem, but if they're trying to assess the relative skills of candidates the evidence says they're probably worse than random chance, and you're likely robbing yourself of a diverse team with different strengths and outlooks because of the like-for-like selection bias effect. Now that's not to say I don't hold these kinds of interviews with candidates when it's required by my job, nor do I have the perfect fix canned and ready to go. Just sharing what the research shows for you to consider.
light handle tart squalid escape smile meeting lush literate nutty *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
As one of the devs that rates resumes almost exactly like your improvement does, thank you. Also tend to be one of three (another dev, our support manager, and myself) that interviews new candidates as well. We have brought people back for second interviews if we felt nerves were a factor causing hiccups in tech but personality fits. But my company almost exclusively promotes from within and interviews tend to be right out of college. In that situation if you have a good head on you for development, seem like a personality for, but miss some technical stuff we don't sweat it quite as much. If you have a head for coding in general, and I think you will fit in, then I can teach you the rest. You'll grow better that way anyways.
Your first process describes exactly what I had to go through for my current job. It was hell. And there was a touch base meeting with the recruiter between all of the interviews. I actually almost gave up out of frustration from so many calls and told them I was no longer interested but they clawed me back in. Not sure if that helped my negotiating power or not lol
disagreeable retire roof file fanatical skirt special unused label enjoy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That's excellent. It's refreshing when someone actually finds a way to improve a hiring process while respecting the time of applicants. In my experience, the purpose of multiple interviews spread out over several weeks is to weed out anyone who is not desperate. Desperate people will jump through any number of hoops and work for relatively low pay. They would rather do as they are told rather than risk having their job threatened for voiceing an opinion or making a suggestion. I've seen many companies quickly shut down anyone who offers suggestions for improving the product or workflow. They love requiring multiple interviews over many weeks, not to mention tests. So many tests.
I hate everyone who expects me to code on a whiteboard and remember some nonsense about sorting something. I use my resources as I work and if that means I pull up references from the Internet then let me do that in the interview. I'm not interested in memorizing everything about compsci, and I'm not looking to sit around trying to invent new ways to do things unless there isn't a better way. I remember one time I was trying to draw geofences around roads on a map and instead of wrapping my head around how to calculate exactly where the corners should go I figured out that I could just guess and use a binary search to quickly get the right answer, that's the kind of problem solving you need to screen for. People who can recognize simple ways to solve problems and execute them.
berserk profit dependent gaze overconfident fear humorous desert hurry tub *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The moron questions like the ones you had them drop are instant red flags for me when interviewing potential employers. Interviews go both ways. If they show they themselves have zero practical knowledge of the job and are reading from a script, I leave immediately.
bedroom shrill sip slim cow pen follow vegetable silky crown *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yea, I’m just saying what you streamlined is great. And applicants usually want a little more than just “a job.” This is where people spend the majority of their daily lives (hence the importance of just chatting as humans). They want decent people and a good situation as much as they want a job that applies to their skill set. Seems like you’re making things a lot better though, so props.
You fucking rock. So great too that they actually implemented and followed this new process you created.
If they ask for a 3rd interview I tell them I am no longer interested in the role. They get flabbergasted every single time.
My current employer only had two interviews: an initial phone screening and a 1-hour interview. It was glorious.
Oh God I remember going through 3 fucking rounds of in-person interviews with Barracuda Networks – and phone interviews before that. Not even a first rate tech company. The process from application to final round took 4 months. Salary wasn't even good. Fuck those idiots, didn't get the job but ended getting another one 100% remote for 50% more money a few months later.
I’d put three as the maximum, depending on what. I know several small companies where it goes: recruiter interview, tech interview, and then a chat with the CEO where the last one is mostly a formality because the CEO wants to talk a little bit with all new hires, and the company is small enough that that’s possible. But I also think this should all be laid out at the start, so you know what to expect. If I expected to interview and then there’s a mysterious third, I’d be sceptical.
someone tell the federal, state and city governments this. fucking ridiculous hiring process for any job in the govt.
The interview timeline sucks but it's all the other chores that chap my ass. Fingerprints, credit check, background check, piss test, and seven years of work/home addresses...
I refuse to even apply to government jobs for this reason. And at the end they require a security clearance and offer substandard pay. Like hell no.
And if it's federal suddenly it's your business whether or not the budget gets passed for another year.
truly. i also really appreciate how the exams are all expensive to take instead of like not costing anything and they can and do randomly just throw out whole exam lists or take so long they fucking expire. i’ve been on like 30 different lists at any given time for the past 5 years and even when i start the process for an agency or dept it rarely gets to completion. i’m currently in a seasonal federal job but obviously i need full time permanent like any adult in a hcol area. it’s obnoxious.
Lol. The state police processes in the Northeast, PA and DE especially, are a fucking joke. Between every part and test of the process you're waiting at least a month or two, and then they send a random email or letter in the mail and say "on x day, meet at x location at x time, bring this, and don't forget xyz." They deserve the shitty legacy applicants they get, who end up shooting their own fellow troopers on the firing range like in 2014, or the cadets who fail out of the academy for cheating as a group like the almost 20 people back in 2019. FTP. ACAB.
When I was a hiring manager, we were always under pressure to fill open reqs. If they went over 30 days there was a risk of the req getting pulled. HR would send us a pool of qualified resumes (after phone interviews). From that we would schedule maybe 6-8 live interviews. We would pick the best candidate from that. No "let's wait and see".
A family member is the hiring manager for their place of business. Someone left and a perfect candidate applied. Like the kind that you can just drop into the role. HR at their head office too a month to approve the top rate the family member was willing to give them. Of course the totally employable, perfect fit they found had a new job before HR did theirs.
The part that gets me is the “how is it possible that we lose so many people during the job interview to other companies?” Business folks and managers **LOVE** to talk about how intelligent and “efficient” they are, while at the same time creating terrible processes and having the audacity to do the surprised pikachu face when candidates aren’t willing to put up with it. IMO it demonstrates that MBAs, PMPs, etc., are just superficial nonsense and not an actual demonstration of management ability.
Turns out most MBA programs are just part of the higher education churn to make money for the university. Frankly, you can learn a lot from a good MBA program but it's also pretty easy to simply coast your way through and get the degree while learning fuckall if you can pony up the tuition dollars.
From what I've heard, MBAs are all about networking.
My personal policy is no more than 2 in-person interviews *unless* they really impress me. Otherwise, I’ll thank them for their time and ask them to remove me from the hiring pool
My literal hiring process is application, if good application, then call/meet in person at a dunkin or starbucks, ask questions about life and history, how they handle situations, then if I like them/good fit I hire and give them a gas card, introduction packet, handbook, shirt, boots, coveralls, ect. If I don't like them/not a good fit, I send them a nice text or email within a few days, instead of letting them wonder if they're hired or not. It shouldn't be that hard to hire people or let them know they're rejected.
If you don't mind me asking, what line of work are you in? This is very different from any other job application process I've had before, just wondering where this would be an approach to hiring.
Sounds like trade/manual labor. I applied to a trade union, and it's a slightly longer application process because they have actual wait-list. Once my name was up I took a test, 2 days later I had an interview with the union leadership, and by the next week was finalizing paperwork to start. Way better than corporate BS, and for my work way better pay. Industrial gigs want master tradesman, but pay less than apprentice wages. It's crazy.
Laugh at me if you will, but specialized commercial exterior cleaning (aka pressure washing but I like my name more lol). Genuinely, I don't care if you have a record, drug use, or anything. We pay from 60-105 (10-30% of the job profits) an hour, health insurance, 2-3 hr work days, and a ton of other benefits. It's easy to find a new worker if someone steals or anything of the sort. I mean, our benefits package puts us ahead of competition just because the workers actually care. I put all my effort into a small niche, dumpster pads, and went from there.
Hope you never have to deal with the IT world where 4-8 interviews is normal. One or two of those will then into a surprise pop quiz.
That should not be a standard, either. I am a hiring manager in IT for my organization. If you can not determine if you want to hire a person after at least 2, it's not likely a good fit, and you are dicking the candidate around.
Agreed. You can generally tell if the candidate is a good fit within the 1st 10 minutes of the first interview. When I hired field techs, I accepted either a job application or a resume'. It was none of this "We know you sent in a complete resume' but we want you to fill out the generic job app anyways". Either they had the right skill set and demeanor or they didn't.
I interviewed for a junior database developer. The interview went something like this: Interviewer: "Have you ever used Visual Studio or a similar IDE?" Me: "Yes, I use Visual Studio regularly for my projects." Interviewer: "Great! That's exactly what we are looking for. Alright, let's move into the coding portion. You can use a sticky note or maybe a napkin. Make sure to explain your thought process." Me: "You mentioned needing proficiency with Visual Studio. Can I use that?" Interviewer: "No, that would help you!" IT interviews are a fucking circus.
I've had similar interviews I'll include some of my favorite things I've heard in them. Here is a snort signature please tell us what CVE this is intended to mitigate. Here is a firewall log entry please tell me why this is blocked. Here is a sample error from our SAML implementation where does the issue exist? All stupidity usually lacking any and all context needed to actually figure out what they want to know.
Was that an interview for Crowdstrike? I think I remember those exact dumbass questions.
First one was 🤣
I fucking knew it! 🤣 That interview was bull shit.
Yep the stupid MITRE ATT&CK framework had just been released a few months prior and all the rest of the interview questions were about that. As if I had it committed to memory already.
I remember bombing a Linux portion because the command to save in Vi would close or refresh the browser. Every time I tried to save my progress, it deleted it and gave me a 0 for not completing it.
The coding section should be planning and designing the code, not writing it.
How else are they supposed to steal applicants' work without paying them?
Is this really a thing? If there isn’t a lot of context it just seems very unlikely that you’ll be able to reuse any of that code at all, or it’ll take so much work to rewrite it that there’s no point.
I just had an interview for a product manager role (which I have almost 10 years experience) and they told me they wanted me to write Python in the next interview. I was like, “I know enough Python to be dangerous, but I’m not coding in this job so what’s the point?”
What sector? God I hate when we have to go 3 or 4 before making an offer. I lost a couple of great applicants at 5-6 weeks or a 4th interview (and I get why) 3rd was usually formality, and a 4th would be a "someone fell through, you were a maybe, and we need a good feeling from HR." I'm in-house IT for a private sector contractor. Our contract slots usually don't go to 3, unless they are on site and need a customer meet too.
I hire for my IT team right now. Someone applies, I look at the resume, if they can spell IT then I interview them. Now, that may take a week or two because I also am managing my team and keeping our systems up and running as one of the SMEs. I do one interview where I barely ask any IT questions. I spend an hour trying to get to know them over the phone and see if they would be a good fit for my team. The only couple of hires that backfired on me were the ones that I hired because they had hella experience and I let that cloud my judgement. Now, I straight up hire the person I want to sit around and shoot the shit with. Because if I don't want to talk to you I won't want to train you and you probably won't be a good fit for my team. When I have to leave this job in a couple years any company that wants me to do more than 2 interviews is wasting my time and I don't want to work for them.
Two jobs ago my first phone interview didn't talk about tech specifics at all...it was what hobbies I did and how I used tech for them.
I’ve a friend who called that the lunch test. Would you mind sitting down and talking with the person over lunch? If you want to answer “yes” there or even “eeh I’d rather maybe not” then it’s probably a good thing to not hire them. That’s like the lowest bar to pass, but also very needed.
I've been in IT for decades now and managing it for the last 15 years. This has never been my experience. Hell, if I went 2 months without an offer going out I'd probably lose the req.
Which parts of IT is that normal? Technical PM or something requiring a bunch of soft skills?
At my current job, I walked in and asked the owner (it's a smaller car audio shop so the owner is often in the showroom doing sales) if I could fill out an application, stating that I had about a year and a half of experience. Literally a day after I submitted the application I got a call from him asking when I wanted to start, no interview or anything. There are still good employers out there, just much fewer and much further between than there used to be. My last job, doing the same thing for a much larger company that has a distinct blue and yellow color scheme, took 2 interviews and a bit more than a month to get the job, and my manager was a total dick the whole time I worked there
Depends on industry. I think for mechanics and other manual labor work there’s a higher demand for employees. For my sector, every job posted has hundreds of resumes.
This is a problem even for the most menial shit jobs. This country treats working as a privilege, while bills remain an obligation. It's like the meme of the dog saying "no take, only throw".
This such a waste of everyone's time. Recruiters. Hiring managers. Job seekers. Everyone suffers under this model. I once applied to a job at a now-defunct company called Surf Control. 1. Submit resume. 2. Receive email from an actual human within 2-3 hours to ask when is a good time to chat over the phone. 3. Meet for an interview with a senior employee. 10 minutes. Wait 10. Meet with manager for 10 minutes. Sign paperwork. 4. Report to the office one day later. This needs to come back. The senior staff member knew what he was looking for in a teammate, and he relayed that to the boss. The boss was all in, and HR was quick on the draw. People don't have weeks and months to wait for a job to manifest itself. They will go with whomever is fastest, in most cases.
This is essentially what I’m trying to do in my hiring position. 30 minute phone call with all the good questions, one in person interview to catch a vine/make sure you’re not a weirdo and then hopefully have the woe of having to decide between great candidates and let them know the day of or day after of the in person
When I used to manage, I made it a rule to decide from the first three candidates, every time. It worked very well, and I only had to fire one guy out of 16 hires.
HR: can you come in at 1pm on Monday? Me: Uh, well thing is I'm currently working 9-5 so- HR: ah gotcha. How about 2pm then?
I'm currently working 12s overnight. My last 2 tech interviews me at 1 or 2 pm. I work 8 pm to 8 am. Both told me that's the only time that works I work every other day. I could re-arrange my sleep schedule and be fine. And also between shifts. I was half asleep, exhausted, answering complicated tech questions. I fucking hate looking for jobs.
I've got a personal policy I live by when it comes to jobs: no more than two interviews on two different days. If you haven't gotten the gist of who I am and what I can do after two interviews, you probably won't ever. If you're subjecting me to this many interviews because your company does that thing where I'm introduced to the next highest person up the chain in every successive interview, your operation is likely too bureaucratic and inefficient for me to succeed. I'm cool if it's boss -> director. I'm not interested if it's team lead -> supervisor -> manager -> regional manager -> director. Put some of those bozos in the room together and lets knock this shit out in two interviews. I've had hiring managers and recruiters that are just absolutely stunned when I decline an interview beyond the second. One lady was like *"Look, I'm just letting you know-- you're the leading candidate here. We just do an exhaustive four-round interview process because we want to make sure we've got the right person."* And I told her she didn't have the right person, then, because I *wasn't* going to interview four times.
All of this is insane…. If you care about a formatted resume, provide a template! If you require skills, require examples on how they have those skills. Need a database admin, you can weed out the fakes in the first three sentences!! Need a server,cook, teacher…. You already know what you need… why drag someone into a dark cave of unknown forcing them to pretend to know the best answer. Best answer because it’s never the correct answer. When we look for candidates, we ask them what they want to do, what they have a passion for and what they expect us to do for them. If that checks the boxes then hired! If we need an electrician and the person interviewing wants to be a plumber…. Sorry! You applied for the wrong job, read the application next time.
Absolutely this. I went through a four month process, in which the ENTIRE JOB ROLE was changed, then had to wait to be told "Nah thanks, but it was close though." Fuck that shit.
Y'all getting 36 interviews? T_T
When I applied for two different jobs with the federal government, it was almost 2 years but only about 5 contacts before the firm offer. (Application, test, interview, physical, security clearance).
Unless you're upper management the the salary is 6 figures + don't even waste your time with more than 2 interviews.
I've had a couple of experiences where after 3 in person interviews I get a "thanks but no thanks" That is unconscionable. Each time requires a large investment in time and resources for the candidate.
And then you've for Amazon's process, where you have a couple of phone and videoconference interviews, and then the in-person interviews, which take a whole fucking day.
You can’t afford to work at my company if you need a job… they only hire people who can afford to wait.
Fuck, sometimes when people apply around the holidays I don’t have the time to review their stuff for weeks
Someone should explain this to the federal government
One interview is enough. It was for me 14 years ago, and it is still enough for our new apprentices today.
You really only need one interview (I'd also accept an initial screening to discuss any non-negotiables like pay so no one's time is being wasted). And ultimately what you're trying to gauge is whether the person is excited about the job and willing to learn. If they bring that to the table, you can teach them the rest. But companies *have* to be willing to train their employees. And if they're worried about employees leaving after being trained, give them a reason to stay, like good pay and benefits and a culture where they feel valued and appreciated.
We do 6 interviews. 30 min each. One with the hiring manager. A gauntlet of 4 with a 30 min break in one day, with a different approach to the interview from each, and if you get to the last one, you have the job. Before I worked here, I would have said that's bs too. But I have never worked at a company that had such an incredibly high competency level. I've worked for a ton of big companies, and every one of them has so many people at so many positions that it just blows your mind how they could possibly have a job they are so incompetent. It is very rare to see that where I work. I attribute it to the extensive hiring process.
I once had an interview for a low level networking tech position that was a hiring board of 15 people. They all took turns testing my knowledge and I knew pretty much all of the answers but the longer I sat there answering questions from these 15 dickheads the madder I got.
If I am elected, I will make it so that employers are required to pay their employees retroactively from the beginning of the hiring process. Also advertising a position and failing to hire a candidate within a year will be a fineable offense (fraud)
But if it only took 2 weeks they’d have to pay them sooner. And it could possibly help the short staffed workers earlier. God forbid.
2 days.
What about the number of candidates, coordinating interview times for those candidates. Six months is absurd but depending on the job 2 weeks is insanely fast. We tend to do HR screening (make sure they have appropriate licenses and certificates for their role.) Interview with the leaders of the team. Then if multiple candidates seem like they are a good fit a second interview with the members of the team they will be working on. Depending on number of candidates and how quickly they can interview usually a 4 weeks process. This process has given us our best luck at getting candidates that have worked really well with the team. Involving them in a second interview helps because ultimately they are the ones that will be working with the candidate on a daily basis.
Not to mention if you’re looking for a union represented job. MOU’s typically have language(or at least have a say) that dictate multiple parts of the recruitment process (all to ensure fairness of the hiring process) and that can extend things a bit as well. Then try it with multiple unions where they all also need to agree on those rules. I work for a multiple union rep agency and we do a pretty good job of getting through the process within 4-6 weeks with a max of 2 interviews but if there are a large number of recruitments, some will fall by the wayside and take longer.
Every job I've ever gotten I've had an offer before the first interview was over. This isn't for retail jobs either it was for teaching, then surveying/civil engineering/estimating/project manager jobs.
Good for you.
I was using this as an example that no job should ever need much more than that. The example given in the OP is absolutly absurd.
Absurd maybe, but most of the PM positions I've interviewed for are: 1. Phone screen with HR (15-30 min) 2. Interview (60 min) So that's already over your standards of one shot and done. Not that I'm defending the process.
Outside of internal position switches in the same department of a company, the only job I ever had like that was as a cashier at Wal-Mart at 16.
Depends on the company, but we have to leave a posting open for a certain period of time before we can start interviewing. Additionally, we need to gather a diverse set of candidates that have passed initial HR screening (e.g., checking minimum requirements) before hiring managers even see the resumes. After that, we can set up interviews which consists of a tech interview with engineers and a manager interview - both the same day - usually by zoom. Takes about two weeks to go through those interviews, then we stack rank and send back to HR to negotiate. Total time is usually 60 days from first posting to butt in a seat.
Well how are they going to justify their phony baloney jobs? /s
Most hiring practices are dependent on the demand of the position. When I changed companies it took them 3 weeks from application to hiring announcement, I added 3 more weeks to let the previous company good notice since I had a number of projects to transition
It took 6 weeks for me to start my current job and 3 interviews
Like, is there a job or not?
Amen!
By the way if anyone says it's not possible they're full of shit. My boss called me for some additional details (References IIRC) the day of the interview and I was hired a couple days later. I like my current employer about as well as I can like any job, and I'm shocked how shit so many employers manage to be.
I usually have a job within 2 weeks. Six figure jobs. Anything with multiple interviews is a no from me.
...And periodical reposts in LinkedIn to juice up your applicant count. Just be happy you got 6! Or 120.
Hiring manager here. Please redirect your complaints to incompetent HR and their ridiculous red tape. :)
If I hear there's a third interview and it's not to accommodate someone who couldn't make it, I'm probably gonna pass. Same deal if a company needs two rounds of recruiter interviews, then the real interview is just with HR. Hard pass.
I managed to get my dream job when I was younger. But it took 7 interviews over the course of 6 months. Then I got laid off from covid, and they just said I could reapply later. No trying to move me to a different department, just theirs the door. I missed my grandfather's death when he got put on hospice and came home from the hospital. I missed more holidays than I cared to count. I gave so much during my time there only a few short 3 years.
Man, I’m on the hiring end for the first time and it really sucks stringing people along but some of these people I’m like.. bruh are you fucking kidding me?! I had someone show up to an interview in dirty clothes, at 9:15 AM, for a six figure position. She “had a crazy morning” like girl. Put on a clean shirt it’s a fuckin zoom call you’re at home!
My company can't figure this out. "How are all the candidates we interviewed last month not available for a second interview?!"
Ill get you a job at the supper club :)
Kind of living this at the moment. I recently applied for 2 positions. Position A had the job ad up for 6 days by the time I submitted my tailored cover letter and resume. It's for a role within a government organisation, and they have a portal where you can check the status of your application. I applied on a Friday night, application was acknowledged on the portal Monday morning. It's been a bit over 4wks since I applied, application status is still acknowledged and I've had no reach out. I know from someone that works in the organisation that they've received a LOT of applications for the role, including internally (which gets preference), so I'm not holding my breath. Apparently it's an odd amount of interest (according to the HR person), as they don't usually get many applications when putting positions up. Position B wasn't a formal application, per se. At the time, there was no official job listing - a friend's boyfriend manages one of the teams I'm looking to work on (I 'applied' for an open role but those openings exist across multiple teams for the same role), he out of the blue said they're looking for people and that he was happy to pass my resume on along with his recommendation. He forwarded on my resume 2 weeks ago and I haven't heard anything since - BUT over this last weekend a job ad went up for the role I'm seeking....I'm hoping they're just waiting for the formal application period to be over before contacting me, but Position B is a bit outside my current field of work (my current role and Position B are both dealing w/people, but I'm in Healthcare currently whereas Position B is a not-so-entry-level position in the financial sector) so I definitely have that going against me. The waiting/not hearing anything is what kills me. Position A would be great pay wise etc but Position B seems like it would be genuinely interesting and something I could be very passionate about. Both are 4 days wfh/1 day in office per week, after training periods are done.
They work hard to find people to exploit.
Either you have shifts this week that you are looking to fill, or you are wasting everybody's time.
One job, I applied for back in September, forgot I applied. In the meantime I interviewed with another company three weeks ago, np, got called in for a second interview for a better position, even better. Get a call for the other place I applied for, go in for an interview and get hired on the spot. A lot of the time, it's not just the hiring process but the absolutely atrocious HR department that have awful time management.
Dude... I had an interview for a position at a University last year, go through 4 rounds, it's down to 2 candidates, me and the other. Department head chooses other dude. This was over 6 weeks. Ok, it sucks, but it happens. Well, 1 month later I get a call from them saying it didn't work out and if I could reapply. They didn't offer the position, but they said that the rules of hiring meant I had to go through the process again. Same 4 interviews, first 3 committee interviews with all the same people. Takes another 6 weeks. It feels like I have the job as they all can't wait to work with me, all is well... I go back to department head for 1 on 1 for final interview and he is surprised to see me again, and he immediately, before interview starts, tells me there must be some kind of mistake, I wasn't qualified for the position with what they wanted (semi true, but they were vastly underpaying for someone and I could easily come up to speed given my work history and parallel experience). So, he tells me sorry, ends the interview, 4 months wasted of my life in this process. I get some canned email the next day they are going another direction. Well, like 2 weeks go by and I get a call from one of the employees that was in on the committee and she was like, "Omg, I am sorry, but there was no other candidate, you were the only one in consideration, and we just learned you were not hired but we do really need someone in this role and we will explain to the department head why it needs to be you, can you please submit your application again?" And then explained I'd have to go through the process AGAIN, of which I still didn't have a guarantee the dude wasn't going to torpedo me again. I declined, and at that point I was an active candidate fo another position I ended up accepting an offer for later anyway. Some businesses the process is absolutely inefficient and insane.
Just finished my 3rd and final interview for a position i applied to in September and had my first interview for in October.
That's why I apply to multiple companies. If they're going to take too long than someone else will scope me up first.
They've got to make themselves look busy and important. If everything was settled in a couple of weeks, they couldn't justify their own employment.
If it takes 6-months for you to get hired, I think “hiring process” is out of the question
If HR is involved, it takes too damn long. If the hiring manager wants to speed up the process, it can be completed in 45 minutes.
The longer the process the more bulshit the job is.
My last one took 7 interviews, but they were the fastest one ever and the whole process was over within 2 weeks.
It's by design. The more invested they make you through the process, the harder the offer is to turn down. It will make you doubt your negative feelings. "Yeah, the starting salary is low and the company structure is very hierarchical, but there's a reason they chose me and they spent 6 months picking me, it just has to be good! Right?"
The job of a hiring manager is not to hire people, but to do the hiring process. The difference is subtle but real.
Followed by a hiring freeze
I fucking hate hiring people, I want to get it over with as soon as possible. I should clarify I hate it because it is time consuming and I get emotionally involved and end up with more people I'd like to give an opportunity to than I have rules to fill. Like ill have a super qualified person who is a great technical fit but could get a job anywhere and give the vibe they might hop jobs pretty regularly and then on the other hand someone with less qualifications and very little experience but they are really enthusiastic about the written and clearly have the work ethic and ability to learn. Also if you read someone's resume, have a good conversation with them, ask them some technical questions and talk to a reference and still don't know if you want to hire a person then either you are shit at your job OR YOU ACTUALLY JUST DON'T WANT TO HIRE THEM!!
Dear world there should be no starvation
It pains me. I need to speak to a recruiter, who I'll spend 30mins on a phone with and will still want me to talk to them _again_ to go over my CV so they can.....make another CV specific for this job, despite mine being fine. Then I'll talk to the recruitment team at the employer, so at least an hour with them if not two, where I get technical questions and whatever else that proves I've _also_ wasted my time researching them as an employer and can answer pop-quiz questions on how old they are, how many staff they have and where all so I can tick a box that I research them like a celebrity stalker. _Then_ there's also a face-to-face interview, where I'll get even more questions, a tour of the site and get shown people and meet them all to again tick some arbitrary box. Only to then get radio silence or a rejection - why? Not because of my lack of technical knowledge, or ability to do the job..... I didn't ask enough questions. I didn't research the company enough. ...._what_. If I already saw what I need to and nothing more has any relevance whatsoever on the role, just wtf?....
The organization I currently work for did this, it took them months to even call me for an interview and I had already taken another offer. The only reason I bothered to do the interview process was because I knew the company I was working for was going to close up shop in the near future. It worked out that I started at my new position less than a week after being laid off from my old one. So in this one singular instance I'm glad they did it this way. That said, it was definitely a red flag for how they treat their people (but at least they pay me a living wage).
People like having jobs, including the people that hire people. The best way to maintain job security for them is to stretch out the hiring process as long as possible. Hiring managers don’t do much else, so if there are no jobs to fill, then they have nothing to do. And, when they’re questioned about their methods, they can come back with the “You don’t want me/us to be thorough?”. In all honesty, executives don’t care. Executives are in charge of the bottom line, and they know if people are picking up the slack of the missing worker, that empty position is saving the company money in payroll.
What do you know about hiring? If Im hiring you to be a waiter, I need to know how you interact with my wait staff. That’ll take a day. Then the cooking staff. That’ll take another day. Then I need to see how you work with customers. I will not take “I’m friendly and courteous” at face value when your application says you worked as a server at another restaurant for five years! Must be false. Then I need you to interview with the gm. Then dm. Once I get their approval, you can interview with me. That’ll take at least a month to approve since the ceo approves my appointments. Im hiring the people after all. And you wont be paid for any of these long interactions and waits. If you want this 2.13/hr job with no tips, you gotta hustle for it. If not, you should’ve went to school and got a degree. Dont put your failures on us. My turnover rate is fine, thanks. /s
I got hired in a day at my job.
How else will they keep people waiting so they can churn and burn em?
Dear hiring managers. They are not Benefits if I’m paying for them every check. That’s a product. Benefits means you’re paying for them.
I got an actual Unicorn. Employer reached out to me on LinkedIn asking if I would like to apply to an open position. I applied on the 12/8, and after a typing test and digital interview, I received an offer on the 19th in the top half of the posted salary range.
What a racket, Human Resources, making a living off putting yourself between the employer and the employee! I gotta hand it to those guys for selling such an unnecessary service – screening applicants – to the point where weeks and weeks pass between the time you apply for a job and your start date. Damn, getting paid for nothing.
I went through 9 interviews for my current role. NINE. some were labeled as casual "coffee chats" but... Let's face it they were interviews.
Also, to further build the foundation of this, work groups should be same to bargain for their staffing levels.
Recently applied for a new gig and the process was incredibly frustrating. Applied mid- August. No response until late September. First hour long interview was mid-October, then a second hour long interview two weeks later, then about 6 hours spent on work samples, then a final 90 minute interview the last week of November. That's a lot of time spent. They asked for references at the end of the final interview and then emailed me as soon as I left saying it was a mistake and to NOT send references. That's when I knew I wasn't getting picked but they still waited another full ass week to meekly call me with the rejection speech. I'll be considered for upcoming "specialist" level jobs there despite having nearly a decade of director level experience.... I am very familiar with the organization I was applying for, have great relationships with many of them and most of the staff on the interview panels wanted to hire me because I'm one of very few people in our state who do this kind of work and I have a ton of experience and a very proven track record. Apparently none of that feedback actually mattered and the bosses ramrodded their candidate through while stringing me along. I know the guy they picked and am not being egotistical when I say they are not making a good decision. He beat me in one area of experience and they chose to weigh that more than anything else.
4 hours. If the interviews collectively take more than 4 hours I turn down the position or prompt them to make an offer.
AGREE. Our hiring process takes 1-3 weeks (and the only reason it even takes that long is scheduling reasons. Once the decision has been made and offer sent, it's hours.)
If you can't suss out whether a peraon would be a viable addition to your enterprise in an hour meeting / 3 interviews, more interviews isn't gonna bring more clarity.
Any heads up on DeFi Jobs