Live data from Hacker News

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

news.ycombinator.com

581–590 of 833 posts

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

#581
post #140

> How is a process like this in any way shape or form efficient or productive? Because hiring the wrong person becomes a colossal waste of time and money.

That's only because you spent thousands having candidates go through 7 interviews.

Interviews are the smallest timesink in all of hiring. I’ve personally whittled down 1000+ resumes to 2 and then those 2 interviewed with 4 people.

We found the right person though.

The number of times I’ve seen a wrong hire fumble their way into our company and burn months and months of time then we have to hire again and then the months of fixing the screw ups disgusts me.

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

#582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we know this isn’t blind faith and the numbers are “made up”? Other than fiat wealth generation, what gains are there to treating each other like this?

I'm not sure what you mean? Are you suggesting that companies shouldn't avoid hiring unqualified people that generate less value than their cost on average?

Research into who brings value, what technologies improve efficiency, has been inconclusive. The models end up with so many variables the conclusions are meaningless; any one parameter is insufficient, all the parameters needed mean no one parameter is greater than another. How can a value assessment being useful given all the required context that also has to exist? Is it a measure of value or traditional human bias?

Humans are prone to group think, belief in words of power, sigils; why believe in unfalsifiable value assessment when it comes down to tried and true ownership?

If traditional politics win at the end of the day why the belief this matrix of value isn’t just another cognitive boondoggle?

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

#583
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is it better than alternatives? this seems like a huge straw-man given almost every company that hires developers thinks they’re a large tech company and mimics their hiring process. it doesn’t seem like serious alternatives have been explored.

Almost every alternative you can imagine has been tried. Lots of interviews, few interviews, take home projects, pair programming, hire fast fire fast, trial periods and on and on and on.

All of these are used in the wild at various companies. Maybe these companies are entirely staffed by subpar engineers, but FAANG style whiteboarding is extremely gameable, especially if you know someone in the inside already, but even if you don't and leetcode enough.

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

#584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It also selects for people who will put up with anything, which to a cynical manager might sound like a good employee, except that our job is to replace labor with machines. People who put up with anything are expensive. They keep billing you hours for tasks that could have been reduced to minutes by someone with a lower tolerance for BS.

Or it selects for easy going people with patience, grit or humility, which seem like positive traits. It is true that companies tend to only hire the suckers that complete their full interview process.

My current company ambushed me with a full interview panel, Gilligan's Island style, when a former coworker invited me to come in for a 3 hour tour. I took it in stride and had fun, and it gave me some additional leverage while negotiating compensation. I remember writing an architecture doc and unit tests when they asked me to code something in an hour and a half. I've been there 6 years and it's been most rewarding for me and my family.

My first job out of school was a solid 8 hours of interviews, and I had a lot of fun during that interview too. I got to work on space ships, and in time made a fortune in equity. I remember preparing a presentation slide deck completely in valid C++ syntax. I also remember taking a red-eye after that interview for another 8 hours of interviews at another company, which I also enjoyed despite having only had 4 hours of sleep.

The 2nd company I worked for decided last minute to interview me for two different roles. That was like 11 hours of interviews. I actually ended up taking the 2nd role because it was a significantly better fit. I brought a large cast iron skillet to that interview, which was a nice ice breaker.

It's true that I put up with a lot of frustrating tasks without complaining, but I personally have zero tolerance for BS. It turns out that the more I push back on BS within an organization, the more I tend to get paid, so in that sense I suppose I am expensive!

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

#585
post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hire fast fire fast is by far the best one, should you really need it. A 20 minute technical conversation and then firing within 2-3 weeks if they do not seem self-directed has worked in my experience. If you can't get someone up to speed with your internal processes fast enough to at least gauge if they're following along that indicates an internal problem. The problem is, I think, that HR does not want technical st…

How do you handle the obvious problems of churn and reviews at places like Glassdoor? I can just see it now: "Interview was weak. They don't know what they're doing." "Aced the interview. Fired after two weeks. Leadership doesn't know how to hire or manage." "Never seen a place with so much churn. In the last six months, I've seen at least half a dozen engineers exit after two or three weeks." Know what raises the le…

Low performing folks are ubiquitous and them being let go sounds good to me, would put a plus in their column if I read that.

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

#586
I kept stats for a couple of years on large numbers of quant financial interviews. Typically up to 15 roughly 30 minute interviews per hired candidate. The probability of getting hired seemed to go to up significantly by interview number until about #7. After that it was flat until the last guy, probably because nobody wanted to say no and contradict the first 10 people. The extra interviews were useful, however, as they helped establish consensus and buy in among the team

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

#587
post #558
post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hire fast fire fast is by far the best one, should you really need it. A 20 minute technical conversation and then firing within 2-3 weeks if they do not seem self-directed has worked in my experience. If you can't get someone up to speed with your internal processes fast enough to at least gauge if they're following along that indicates an internal problem. The problem is, I think, that HR does not want technical st…

> Hire fast fire fast is by far the best one, should you really need it. I can only say that: Oh my gosh do I not want to work for a company that "hires fast and fires fast". For many different reasons.

Working is one thing. What about when you need to get hired and don't have six months to waste? If it weren't for finding a quick place to give me a chance I'd be unemployed.

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

#588
post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost every alternative you can imagine has been tried. Lots of interviews, few interviews, take home projects, pair programming, hire fast fire fast, trial periods and on and on and on.

Hire fast fire fast is by far the best one, should you really need it. A 20 minute technical conversation and then firing within 2-3 weeks if they do not seem self-directed has worked in my experience. If you can't get someone up to speed with your internal processes fast enough to at least gauge if they're following along that indicates an internal problem. The problem is, I think, that HR does not want technical st…

this is rather terrible for people who leave a job to come work for you. Hire fast fire fast only really benefits the employer -and only if they successfully manage to pick up on toxic people that fast. It can take months for someones true colours to show and then in many countries you are past the point you can "fire fast".

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

#589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Resumes aren't really credentials. They're lists of things provided by the individual themselves and are almost always inflated in some way. Reference checks are just "I got someone you don't know (and shouldn't trust) to say good things about me", and meet the team is just "I can talk to people and sound smart for about an hour or two". There are a very large number of idiots who can do those things. I strongly disa…

Those who lie on their resume in a harmful way are immediately apparent upon hiring, and so are quick to fire. Those who do not, are not, and aren't fired. It's really not the risk folks seem to think it is.

Why do you think it’s easy to find who has lied on their resume?

It can take weeks for someone to orient, and as mentioned all over this thread it’s hard to fire people.

I’d rather use a system that avoids hiring people that will need to be fired. Blindly trusting resumes is silly since resumes are hard to verify.

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

#590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's all about everyone. If I hire a person and fire them in less than a year, that's almost always because of a performance problem that's impacting the team or the org. If you're the one being fired, you probably left a job or didn't take some other job to work with us and now you're going to be unemployed. Additionally, as a hiring manager, I too am a human who wants to enjoy my job and have positive experienc…

> Filtering early is best for everyone. This is a lie that everyone tells themselves to make them feel secure and safe. The best interview is working with the person. Do a few basic interviews for competency, give them a 2 week - month long 1099 contract and put them on guard rails for the contract duration. Their daily work isn't just about whether they can jump through time-based hoops or answer basic questions. No…

> The most you can determine from an interview, regardless of how many flaming hoops and balls the candidate bounces off their nose, is whether they know how to code

When I interview I don't even mention code or technical stuff (that is for someone else to ask) and I am able to learn quite a bit about a person and if they would be a good fit. Just because you can't doesn't mean other people can't.

Post reply on HN