Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 833 posts

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#721

Post by CogitoCogito »

MichaelBurge wrote: post #628
rascul wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All of the people involved in the interview process are still getting paid Except the interviewee.

There's often a signing bonus. If there's a 10% chance of getting the job and a $50k signing bonus is common, then your EV is $5000 per interview. Even if there weren't, then 10% of the extra compensation vs. an easier-to-hire company with your discount horizon applied would also count as payment.

If you’re 10% likely to get a job with a 50k signing bonus and you’re doing 7 interviews for that job your expected value is $715 per interview.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#722

Post by BeetleB »

Dudeman112 wrote: post #451
BeetleB wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Amazon literally has a research team focused in hiring, and they run A/B experiments to continually improve the process. The current interview format is not a cargo cult, is a high refine process through the years. The median time an employee stays there is now under 2 years. Clearly Amazon isn't hiring the calibre of people they need.

Alternative hypothesis: they did hire the correct people, but working there is so unpleasant that very few people decide to stick around.

> they did hire the correct people, but working there is so unpleasant that very few people decide to stick around.

There are plenty of Amazonians who can handle the culture and stay much longer. It's clear they are not hiring those who can do. It's not an "alternative" hypothesis, but the same one. They haven't figured out how to identify those who can handle it.

And this, given how heavily behavioral their interview is.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#723

Post by JohnBooty »

pqwEfkvjs wrote: post #233
mabbo wrote: post #44

Having been an interviewer at a FAANG for many years, I can explain some of the logic behind it. I'm not saying this logic is valid , but it's how we got here, imho. First: we no longer trust the hiring manager alone, because probably they aren't a strong developer. We instead trust strong developers that are well trained at evaluating good devs. At the same time, we don't want to thrust a dev onto a hiring manager,…

It is somewhat easy to cheat through these N+1 interviews by grinding tons of practice problems before. At least that was my strategy. Sure I can implement DFS or a linked list, but I am a pretty suboptimal developer, especially when working with huuge codebases. Maybe they should ask to implement a feature or fix a bug in some huge OSS project. That would evaluate skills relevant for a job in FAANG more closely imho…

    but I am a pretty suboptimal developer, especially when 
    working with huuge codebases.
I'm in the same boat when it comes to huge codebases. I see people being effective on them and I often simply do not know how they do it.

But it is for sure, a completely different skill from leetcode style stuff.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#724

Post by analyst74 »

dleslie wrote: post #58
mabbo wrote: post #44

Having been an interviewer at a FAANG for many years, I can explain some of the logic behind it. I'm not saying this logic is valid , but it's how we got here, imho. First: we no longer trust the hiring manager alone, because probably they aren't a strong developer. We instead trust strong developers that are well trained at evaluating good devs. At the same time, we don't want to thrust a dev onto a hiring manager,…

What I'm reading here is that even as an experienced interviewer you struggle to make the format effective and equitable. Sounds to me like the format isn't worth keeping; time to hire more, and fire fast?

Amazon follows the hire fast PIP fast strategy.

Look what that did to their reputation and company culture.

Netflix is a little more successful at this, but they have a much smaller eng footprint and much higher compensation in order to attract and retain top performers.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#725

Post by renewiltord »

nickjj wrote: post #476
renewiltord wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, no Bay Area engineer will take this deal. $200/hr is $100/hr in real post tax income. This is competitive with bartending on a Friday night. If you’re not at $500/hr you’re not even competitive. You can be at $300/hr if you’re guaranteeing the job for a year but if it’s a one off you have to start way higher than that. But free time is more precious. I’d target $1k/hr to play. I think break even is probably sli…

> For $200/hr I’d rather spend the time on my own life. The alternative is spending 7-12 hours doing 5-7 technical interviews for $0.

I got my last job with 5 h. And honestly, I’d rather do 7 h as an interview than 20 h over 2 w for $200/hr. I’m just thinking about this and the thought just makes me feel so bleh.

I think it’s the liability it incurs. A two week commitment. I just can’t see doing it for $4k. It’s just not worth it.

It’s like 4 calls for 4 hours on a consulting platform. Instead of 4 h I have to spend 20 h and spread over 2 w. This kills me.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#726

Post by jpgvm »

joshuamorton wrote: post #310
benreesman wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First: we no longer trust the hiring manager alone, because probably they aren't a strong developer This is a huge problem IMHO. I topped out at L7 on the FAANG EM track, but that’s dozens of ICs and a few EMs in your org and I still think you need to be able to build the software and review diffs and write serious ones now and again. Clearly this is now only part of your job, not the focus of it, but it’s very dif…

An L6 manager and an L6 IC do different work though. And it's rarely (read: never) the case that the person in charge is most knowledgeable about all the details. If an L6 manager could keep all of the details of all of the things all their reports are working on organized, they aren't handling enough scope. Imo that's the difference between 5 and 6. You can no longer track all the details in one person's head.

The most knowledgeable person doesn't always have the title but they are usually the head of the shadow org that actually gets the job done.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#727

Post by rendall »

jugg1es wrote: post #343
StupidUser123 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a HM at a big tech company with this format as well. Honestly, I really like it. I don’t want to hire the wrong person, it’s expensive and it makes my job awful for a while. It’s great getting data points on several programming interviews, system design, etc. That makes my sell interview so much easier because I can trust the process to assess their technical skills. You need multiple people because you’re consta…

I would agree with you if the interview process included ANY feedback to interviewees when they were rejected. Prior to COVID, I got flown to Seattle mid-week for 2 nights and interviewed well (the recruiter told me to start looking for houses). But 20 days later I was basically ghosted by my recruiter and I had to escalate to their manager to get a response that I was rejected. They gave me no feedback at all. The i…

> "...I failed the phone screen somehow by someone who sounded 20 years younger than me..."

Consider, possibly, that the mismatch is explained in this sentence.

I will absolutely give high weight to how the receptionist is treated by the candidate.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#728

Post by dleslie »

analyst74 wrote: post #724
dleslie wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm reading here is that even as an experienced interviewer you struggle to make the format effective and equitable. Sounds to me like the format isn't worth keeping; time to hire more, and fire fast?

Amazon follows the hire fast PIP fast strategy. Look what that did to their reputation and company culture. Netflix is a little more successful at this, but they have a much smaller eng footprint and much higher compensation in order to attract and retain top performers.

Where I am, in BC, Amazon is recognized as a challenging but rewarding employer; one that compensates better than most and expects consistently strong results.

I wouldn't consider that negative, really. Daunting, perhaps.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#729

Post by Dudeman112 »

BeetleB wrote: post #722
Dudeman112 wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternative hypothesis: they did hire the correct people, but working there is so unpleasant that very few people decide to stick around.

> they did hire the correct people, but working there is so unpleasant that very few people decide to stick around. There are plenty of Amazonians who can handle the culture and stay much longer. It's clear they are not hiring those who can do. It's not an "alternative" hypothesis, but the same one. They haven't figured out how to identify those who can handle it. And this, given how heavily behavioral their intervie…

If they need people who are immune to how much shit their work environment is, they should fix their work environment instead of selecting those who are fine with Victorian sweatshop-like conditions.

If the problem was a loud office you'd say they should select for deaf engineers instead of fixing their shit.

Re: Ask HN: When did 7 interviews become “normal”?

#730

Post by kelnos »

tartoran wrote: post #297
novok wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PIPing and firing is a huge time and emotional energy suck, and it sucks for people on both sides. To reduce the amount it happens is worthy. You can’t in practice just say, “this guy sucks, lets fire him next week” And it shows, barely anyone in my entire career has ever been fired. I only personally have been close to one.

> PIPing and firing is a huge time and emotional energy suck, and it sucks So is the 7 interview gauntlet. But I guess it just shifts the burden on the candidates and externalizes cost.

Perhaps, but PIPing and firing is bad for the employee, bad for the manager, and bad for the PIP'd employees teammates. PIPs don't happen immediately; it might take a month or two before it's clear to a manager that a new employee isn't performing to the expected level.

So I think I'd rather have a candidate spend 7 hours interviewing if it could save months of pain for multiple people later.

(This does assume, of course, that the 7-person interview panel actually does decrease the incidence of hiring-the-wrong-person enough to be worthwhile. I don't know if that's actually the case.)

Out of all the things I think are wrong with tech jobs -- and with employment in general -- I don't think "I have to interview with 7 people instead of 1 or 2" even cracks the top 50.

Post reply on HN