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

Exit interviews are a trap

jacobian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 431 posts

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#61

Post by treis »

optymizer wrote: post #45
andrew_ wrote: post #6

Generally spot on in my experience. I've only ever agreed to one, and it was a mess, with the interviewer getting very upset and pushing back on all of my answers. Since then I politely decline. I've had one boss tell me it wasn't optional, to which I responded that I'd be happy to leave earlier if he wanted to enforce the requirement. He swiftly backed down, as we hadn't yet finished knowledge transfer.

Hypothetically and assuming 1) at-will employment, 2) company policy requires exit interview and 3) they didn't care about the knowledge transfer, could the company then terminate you "for cause" because you refused to do the exit interview?

Probably but that just means they're on the hook for unemployment.

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#63

Post by wccrawford »

arcticbull wrote: post #34

I generally agree, but it also depends why you left. If you left because you hate your boss, yeah probably pass. If you left because you hate your co-workers, yeah probably pass. If you left because you hate the new direction of the company - pass. If you loved working there but want to work in a different field, your buddy started a company, you got a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to move to France - no reason not…

IMO you should always go to the exit interview, even if only not to burn bridges. But the information you provide should be as bland as possible.

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#64

Post by xxs »

dweinus wrote: post #39

Is everyone really doing exit interviews this wrong? At my company the exit interview is with HR. All feedback is anonymous, rolled up with non-exit feedback, and delivered to managers/leads periodically so it can't be easily linked back. As a manager, this has been extremely helpful. HR is not always your friend, but in my scenario there is really nothing to lose.

>All feedback is anonymous

How do you know that?

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#65

Post by ryanbrunner »

dweinus wrote: post #39

Is everyone really doing exit interviews this wrong? At my company the exit interview is with HR. All feedback is anonymous, rolled up with non-exit feedback, and delivered to managers/leads periodically so it can't be easily linked back. As a manager, this has been extremely helpful. HR is not always your friend, but in my scenario there is really nothing to lose.

Anonymous feedback very, very rarely is. Even when everyone involved is doing their best to keep it anonymous, it very rarely is.

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#66

Post by mooxie »

legitster wrote: post #26

I have no idea what the author is on about. The exit interview is often the best 30 minutes of a bad job! You can tell them what they are doing well, what they aren't doing well, praise good employees and criticize bad managers. If you are both professionals, it's a cathartic experience that supports your remaining coworkers. If they are not professional, they weren't going to give you a good reference anyway. But if…

Also I'm not convinced on the idea that it is unlikely to elicit change. My current employer takes exit interviews very seriously when they lose good people, and tries to fix the situation before losing more.

Like you said, if it is handled professionally - that is, you have valid concerns/criticisms that you are able to quantify and address in a constructive manner - it can be very useful for everyone involved.

I get that for every company that seems to care there are probably 10 that seem to not, but I always find this sort of stereotypical "work sucks and is a zero-sum game" attitude that is common on Reddit and HN a little saddening. Sure, your primary concern should be to take care of yourself, but this idea that everything with 'Inc.' after its name is full of layers of uncaring, heartless drones is frankly untrue. People think the same about IT/tech/dev, and it's not true there either. It does not have to be you vs them, even when you decide to leave.

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#67

Post by whimsicalism »

politelemon wrote: post #58

> They might decide not to give a reference they would have before the exit interview. At least in the UK, there aren't good or bad reference. It basically boils down to "Yep they worked here, for this long, this was their role." All of the other possible outcomes mentioned are illegal.

Yeah I don't think in the US other outcomes are illegal per se, but in practice only what you describe is what is happening among Big N tech companies.

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#68

Post by eli »

ryanbrunner wrote: post #65
dweinus wrote: post #39

Is everyone really doing exit interviews this wrong? At my company the exit interview is with HR. All feedback is anonymous, rolled up with non-exit feedback, and delivered to managers/leads periodically so it can't be easily linked back. As a manager, this has been extremely helpful. HR is not always your friend, but in my scenario there is really nothing to lose.

Anonymous feedback very, very rarely is. Even when everyone involved is doing their best to keep it anonymous, it very rarely is.

Obviously it's not anonymous to the interviewer. Clearly in this case it was anonymous to the manager receiving the feedback. I think this is not too uncommon.

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#69

Post by shevis »

The one piece missing from this is article is the fact that some people do actually have a vested interest in the continued success of the company even after leaving (e.g. option/stock holders). Not that your feedback will likely have any material effect on the value of the company, but you never know!

Re: Exit interviews are a trap

#70

Post by jayd16 »

daenz wrote: post #30

In an exit interview I've done, it was clear to me that HR was trying to spin a story about why I was leaving that didn't align with what I was saying or trying to say. They were nice enough, but it was full of questions that appeared to be designed to invalidate my thoughts or feelings. For example, the question: "But did you have the resources you needed to do your job?" to my point of "I felt like I was set up to…

In my experience, HR will end up painting something banal as the main reason for an exit instead of ever (publicly) admitting to some creative or strategic differences.

Saying "the new job is closer too" will lead to the narrative that the reason was 100% based on commute time.

Post reply on HN