The rise of never-ending job interviews • Hacker News Board

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#31

Post by zug_zug » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:41 AM UTC

spoonjim wrote: post #8

I think the third party screening companies will eventually win here. There will be an objective measure of skill at the job, plus some culture/fit interviews.

It does seem like the obvious efficient solution hypothetically. Right now we have proxies "Well he worked at FAANG so he's probably good enough for us" on the company side and glass-door (horribly subjective) on the individual side. But really no way for extremely-qualified individuals to say "show me all job offers within X miles that pay more than $y for position $z" (closest thing I'm aware of is indeed).

That said, for whatever reason the startups that tried to be intermediaries (and also various recruiters) tend not do very well in my experience.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#32

Post by 2001lodyssee » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:41 AM UTC

DSingularity wrote: post #5

vegetablepotpie wrote: post #2

What’s happening is that companies want to completely remove risk from the hiring process. In the real world, you cannot remove risk. You can manage it, but you cannot remove it. Asking candidates to go through 6 interviews before making a decision and not telling them when a decision will be made signals a risk adverse culture that cannot make decisions.

The reason they want to remove the risk is because it takes years to prune bad talent.

In my long and storied career, well long at least, every single truly heinous, project-killin', crazy person actually interviewed pretty well.

Honestly, I don't have a good solution to the problem.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#33

Post by LAC-Tech » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:41 AM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #18

vegetablepotpie wrote: post #2

What’s happening is that companies want to completely remove risk from the hiring process. In the real world, you cannot remove risk. You can manage it, but you cannot remove it. Asking candidates to go through 6 interviews before making a decision and not telling them when a decision will be made signals a risk adverse culture that cannot make decisions.

Companies don't want to do job training anymore. Instead of a general background and attitude check, they need to know if the candidate has all of the individual skills that will be used on the job.

This a hundred times over. I still remember in 2020 multiple places asking me "I see you've used .NET core, what *version* have you used?".

I had a kind of career crisis/breakdown, where I realised no one gave a shit about anything except my utility as a walking set of tech keywords. Accepting that it wasn't working for me was one of the best things I've done for my career.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#34

Post by easterncalculus » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:42 AM UTC

It's just such a waste of time, too - you toss out so many other potential opportunities when doing these. I've heard of this being done to interns, people that only have so much time to get a job. Six interviews until a rejection. If you can't start your career without this going on I don't really know what you can do. I can't imagine the recruiters conducting these in the same position, going for six interviews to get that job. For software engineers you just need it, apparently.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#35

Post by ajna91 » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:43 AM UTC

throwaway984393 wrote: post #21

If you go to an interview, you can probably suss out which are stringing you along and which want to hire quickly. Ask if they need a candidate immediately or are taking their time. Ask if your qualifications are exactly what they're looking for, and if you feel like a cultural fit for them. Ask if they have the budget and headcount to hire you immediately. Ask which teams the people interviewing you are on, to find…

good advice

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#36

Post by kinkrtyavimoodh » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:44 AM UTC

jimbob45 wrote: post #28

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Job training is not as much worth it for companies when employees can switch jobs at the drop of a hat.

You say that and I’ve seen several companies in practice echo what you’re saying. However, I fail to understand why they don’t simply make better use of contracts and probationary periods to solve that specific problem.

Contacts in what sense?

Probationary periods could work but it's a coordination problem. Such periods are the norm in Europe (coz it's very hard to fire someone) but for an at-will place like the US, given that the industry doesn't really do probationary periods in general, any employer who starts doing it would be at a disadvantage.

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#37

Post by thrwaway122 » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:44 AM UTC

alephnan wrote: post #16

vegetablepotpie wrote: post #2

What’s happening is that companies want to completely remove risk from the hiring process. In the real world, you cannot remove risk. You can manage it, but you cannot remove it. Asking candidates to go through 6 interviews before making a decision and not telling them when a decision will be made signals a risk adverse culture that cannot make decisions.

I left a hedgefund interview loop for this reason. I finished the 7th on-site interview. After I left NYC and flew back home, they wanted a 8th ( phone screen ) interview because one the interviewers lost the results. On the one hand, this space’s modus operandi is more data is always better. On the other hand, they have to trade and make decisions in a fast paced environment with imperfect information.

funny same experience here. I interviewed for four months at a very select and under the radar fund. Once a week I would go in from 730 am to 9 am and speak with a member of the fund. I got all the way to the end, and in a bout of emotional torment, I turned the offer down. In hindsight, its one of the biggest regrets I have. Would have retired long ago

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#38

Post by xcambar » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:46 AM UTC

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #36

jimbob45 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that and I’ve seen several companies in practice echo what you’re saying. However, I fail to understand why they don’t simply make better use of contracts and probationary periods to solve that specific problem.

Contacts in what sense? Probationary periods could work but it's a coordination problem. Such periods are the norm in Europe (coz it's very hard to fire someone) but for an at-will place like the US, given that the industry doesn't really do probationary periods in general, any employer who starts doing it would be at a disadvantage.

I think GP meant "reference check"

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#39

Post by uglygoblin » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:47 AM UTC

Rapzid wrote: post #17

I interviewed with four companies back in May for staff engineer roles(or staff equiv). Based on that experience and my current employers process a somewhat baseline expectation can be: * Phone screen with recruiter that reached out to you * Screen with the hiring manager * Behavioral interview with multiple peeps * Code pairing session with multiple peeps * System design session with multiple peeps So AT LEAST 5 hou…

I had the same experience earlier in the year and ended up bailing out/declining offers because the process was giving me bad feelings about the work cultures at said companies.

I did actually tell one that the schedule of phone interviews (2) and video call rounds (4) was too much commitment without more details about the role and salary range. They responded with "if that's too much commitment the position is too".

Dodged that bullshit!

Re: The rise of never-ending job interviews

#40

Post by bufferoverflow » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 2:47 AM UTC

xyst wrote: post #19

Interviewing these days is not a technical challenge. It’s a fraternity/sorority rushing week. Technically I was qualified and able to answer their questions. But ultimately was turned down after 6 rounds of interviewing. I think I was heavily dinged because I wasn’t entirely familiar with their product in the wild, and was never given any hint as to what product I would be working on.

I'm surprised good programmers have the time/patience for 6 interviews. I think 3, maybe 4 is my max. If you can't figure out my skills in that amount of time, your process is broken.

I also disagree that interviewing is not a technical challenge. For most programmers it is. There are very few who can breeze through FAANG-level technical interviews.