If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever • Hacker News Board

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#71

Post by PebblesHD » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:06 AM UTC

PretzelPirate wrote: post #60

PebblesHD wrote: post #44

These styles of multi-round interviews inspired by the FAANG collective started picking up in Australia before the pandemic, but it got to a point where most of my more talented colleagues and I all agreed it just wasn’t worth the time for the salaries being offered. 4 round interviews for a ‘senior’ developer position on $120k? When interviewing my own candidates, I use a 1 hour interview mostly focused on approach…

I don't like having one interview with one interviewer. That can easily result in that interviewer having a bad day or simply being biased and costing someone a job.

Agreed, it can also be uncomfortable for persons not of the same gender as the interviewer, so I always take a second person and try to ensure we always have a mix of men and women scheduled as that other person depending on who we’re interviewing to minimise the single point of me/another manager having a bad day.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#72

Post by PebblesHD » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:07 AM UTC

profile53 wrote: post #67

PretzelPirate wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like having one interview with one interviewer. That can easily result in that interviewer having a bad day or simply being biased and costing someone a job.

Even in a panel or multiple round interview, it usually only takes one no to end the process for the candidate. So I don’t see how this is any worse.

For one, this one only requires the candidate to provide an hour of their time, which for me is the main reason I personally avoid multi-round interviews.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#73

Post by Salgat » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:09 AM UTC

xtracto wrote: post #69

happyopossum wrote: post #27

I’ve seen so many of these jokes and complaints about modern SV interviews that I was blown away when I recently interviewed at a FAANG… I was assigned a recruiter who communicated clearly and often with me, told exactly how many interviews I was doing (3), what each was about, and all 3 were scheduled on the same day, and were handled by extremely smart and supportive people. Offer came through by the end of the wee…

I found it funny that a week ago I got an email from a Google recruiter, offering me to enter their interviewing machinery. I bluntly told him that I rejected the offer because of the horror stories regarding 5-7 interviews in Google. The recruiter's reply was that it was ok of this was not an appropriate time for me , and that we would stay in touch. How can they be so dense? Of course it may be that they are also j…

Google is one of the few companies that has enough talent applying to be able to turn away perfectly good candidates. All those hoops you jump through ensure you're willing to go above and beyond a healthy level to "serve" the company.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#74

Post by PebblesHD » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:09 AM UTC

gabeio wrote: post #65

PebblesHD wrote: post #44

These styles of multi-round interviews inspired by the FAANG collective started picking up in Australia before the pandemic, but it got to a point where most of my more talented colleagues and I all agreed it just wasn’t worth the time for the salaries being offered. 4 round interviews for a ‘senior’ developer position on $120k? When interviewing my own candidates, I use a 1 hour interview mostly focused on approach…

> We have a probation period to work out if they’ve over-promised I'm curious what you mean by over-promised? Unless you only do this for people who don't already have a job, this sounds more toxic than multiple interviews. "Oh yeah we want you to work for us, but quit your old company, we'll try you out for a few weeks and if not we'll go our separate ways" ... but they quit their previous company so it's not as nic…

Valid question. By that I mean if were looking for someone with experience in X, Y, and Z, we’ve had situations where applicants have done enough research to have a conversation about X but not have any practical or troubleshooting experience with it, which we needed. The probation period means we don’t need to grill someone on every aspect of the role, instead we can focus on the absolute core of what we need and specify the rest in the JD, and if someone claims to know it we can safely take their word with minimal risk of committing ourselves if they can’t then pick it up in a few weeks.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#75

Post by yrgulation » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:09 AM UTC

jackblemming wrote: post #63

Retric wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re selling your life, focusing on chasing ever more money is a poor trade IMO. Not saying you have to join a non profit, just consider what you want to work on, who you want to work with, and the kind of hours you want to put in.

It always amuses me seeing programmers chasing as much money as possible when they make a fraction of executives or many other professions. Even if they're at the "elite grand master SRE" level. Still a fraction of some MBA.

thats why i keep telling people that software “engineering” or computer “science” are not worth pursuing. unless you use either as a launchpad. these types of jobs are just fancy bricklaying.

however there is nuance to everything. some people find 200k a year and living with flatmates in an expensive city rewarding. to each their own. i know i did. until it hit me.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#76

Post by lovich » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:10 AM UTC

sulam wrote: post #35

lovich wrote: post #25

I don't disagree with this articles satire, as it lines up with my experience if you remove a bit of the hyperbole. I am however curious as to why companies continue to do this and seem to be increasing their interview requirements in the face of an inability to hire. The most reasonable sounding answer I can come up with is that executives are balking at engineering pay and rationalizing it to themselves by demandin…

Not really. It comes down to the asymmetry in hiring outcomes. It is much more expensive to hire a bad employee than it is to hire a good employee. It’s gotten exceptionally hard to just fire people in corporate America, at-will employment notwithstanding.

Is it more expensive than leaving the position open for months though? I’ve seen multiple companies I’ve applied at and my own employer just sit with empty roles which meant the job never got done.

I was under the impression from the startup world and my won engineering experience that getting to market with a substandard product was always better than never releasing because you were aiming for perfection.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#77

Post by As_You_Wish » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:10 AM UTC

lovich wrote: post #25

I don't disagree with this articles satire, as it lines up with my experience if you remove a bit of the hyperbole. I am however curious as to why companies continue to do this and seem to be increasing their interview requirements in the face of an inability to hire. The most reasonable sounding answer I can come up with is that executives are balking at engineering pay and rationalizing it to themselves by demandin…

It is super expensive to hire someone. The costs are enormous.

Let's take a hire that will make $10,000 per month, nice round number.

Someone in HR has to write the job description. This takes the HR person's time, the hiring manager, the hiring manager's boss just to get the information for a job description

Job description cost with hiring manager: $500 Job description cost with hiring manager's boss: $500 HR person's time to talk to hiring managers and to write the job description: $1000

Job board postings: $250

Headhunters if found through them: $30,000 (3 month's salary)

Corporate career page posting and social media posting of job description: $500

Interviewing with multiple people, even a few rounds: $5,000-$10,000

Hring temporary/freelance person to cover work to be done by permanent hire before new employee leaves prior job and starts with yours: $20,000

Filling out paperwork and miscellaneous expenses: $1,500

Employee takes 3 months getting up to speed and not really producing, but still being paid: $30,000

Employee decides the job is not a good fit for him or her and quits 9 months later: $90,000 wasted.

*Total cost to hire and then the person quits:* $184,250 wasted

Additional cost: cost of not getting work done because of hiring errors, that needs to be done: ???? you tell me. A lot.

So a company hires 50 people and 20 quit because the were not vetted propertly: that is $3,685,000 in wasted money. Now, realize that this $3,685,000 is in after tax dollars, so if the company's profit margin is 15%, it takes $24,566,667 in product and/or service sales to cover those wasted hiring expenses. Because those 20 employees were fired or quit, it will take another $24,566,667 in sales to cover the next round of hiring, or almost $50,000,000. If those new 20 hires, if 8 of them quit...well, the game goes on and on.

So, a company best be damn careful in one's hiring practices.

(numbers above might or might not be accurate, but it doesn't matter, that's not the point. The point is that it costs a lot of money to hire and then lose an employee after a short time period due to employee quitting, or getting fired for incompetence, anger issues, harassment problems, or whatever. Hiring highly paid employees is a dangerous game.

This is from the company's perspective, not yours. But if you started your own company, would you want to pay $50 million for bad hiring decisions? No. You would make double-damn sure there would be a lot of vetting processes.

And realize, this is not about you for anyone reading this. It's about the statistics over dozens of hiring decisions.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#78

Post by citizenkeen » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:11 AM UTC

gabeio wrote: post #65

PebblesHD wrote: post #44

These styles of multi-round interviews inspired by the FAANG collective started picking up in Australia before the pandemic, but it got to a point where most of my more talented colleagues and I all agreed it just wasn’t worth the time for the salaries being offered. 4 round interviews for a ‘senior’ developer position on $120k? When interviewing my own candidates, I use a 1 hour interview mostly focused on approach…

> We have a probation period to work out if they’ve over-promised I'm curious what you mean by over-promised? Unless you only do this for people who don't already have a job, this sounds more toxic than multiple interviews. "Oh yeah we want you to work for us, but quit your old company, we'll try you out for a few weeks and if not we'll go our separate ways" ... but they quit their previous company so it's not as nic…

If they said in the interview they’re very comfortable with Vue.js and Postgres, and then you find out after a few weeks that actually they barely know Vue or Postgres, they actually come from a React/SQLite background, they’ve overpromised.

Rather than ensuring every bullet point on their resume is factual through six interviews I’ve found it’s better to assume they’re honest and as capable as advertised, interview for personality, and then if they’ve oversold themselves that’s why it’s called a 90 probationary period.

I don’t get cranky if someone quits (even with no notice) within 90 days, for any reason. And I’ll let someone go within 90 days, for any (legal, ethical) reason.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#79

Post by stevenwoo » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:11 AM UTC

pcthrowaway wrote: post #8

FROM: jobs@bubbleapp.com DATE: October 5, 2022 Dear Applicant, As you may be aware, the past three weeks have been a test. You have been “working” at a facsimile of our HQ staffed by trained actors. Finally, an explanation for all the software devs who can't fizzbuzz!

This sounds a bit like The Rehearsal semi-reality show hosted by Nathan Fielder.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#80

Post by PebblesHD » Sat, Sep 03, 2022, 2:12 AM UTC

eastbound wrote: post #61

PebblesHD wrote: post #44

These styles of multi-round interviews inspired by the FAANG collective started picking up in Australia before the pandemic, but it got to a point where most of my more talented colleagues and I all agreed it just wasn’t worth the time for the salaries being offered. 4 round interviews for a ‘senior’ developer position on $120k? When interviewing my own candidates, I use a 1 hour interview mostly focused on approach…

I’m sorry, what are typical pays for a junior engineer (Say, JS and Java?), a medium and a senior?

Depends which section of the industry you end up in, but in the big banks which are some of the largest java shops, a cadet/intern will end up around $45k, a junior around $55-65k, an ordinary dev around $80-90k, and a senior anywhere from $115-$150k but weighted toward the lower end. Then of course there’s the rest of the buzzword fleet, DevOps engineers are a bit of a premium on those figures, architects the same.