11–20 of 31 posts
I haven't had a reference check in a long time. The last company that asked for them didn't even check them. Any hiring people out there feel that reference checks provide any meaningful insight?
Particularly referencing down for when you hire managers.
Reading between the lines, he committed to this candidate that the candidate was getting an offer; the candidate declined other offers on that basis, and did not actually get that offer.
The candidate should have retained a lawyer.
For anyone reading this and starting their careers, just know everything a recruiter says is bullshit until the docusign lands in your inbox.
To everyone else: talk to your references about what you want them to say! Don't just ask for a reference and leave it at that. Treat explicit reference checks like the formality that they are; you have no special obligation to present a super true, clear picture of your experience with your reference. Just make sure the reference gets you to "yes".
Serious reference checks usually aren't explicit (like, "give us a list of 3 people for references"), precisely because everyone with career skills knows to coach their references. In fact, because so many references are coached, negative feedback looks especially bad in them.
My favorite part of this story is that a major lesson this hiring manager learned from the process was to groom reference feedback for the offer committee, just further exposing what a farce explicit reference checks are in reality.
Hiring managers: the other big lesson here is, don't do things the way Google does them. It works for Google because there's so much cachet and stability associated with Google that they can afford to randomly turn down qualified applicants. You're unlikely to be in the same situation.
The candidate learned a very valuable lesson: Never believe any assurances that the recruiter gives you about how likely you are to get the job.
The candidate likely lost hundreds of thousands of dollars due to their believing the recruiter (going from being hired by large Silicon Valley companies, to finding a startup at the last minute).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding of Google is that they're ok with false negatives because they consider false positives to be far far worse.
False negatives are a burden on your candidates, false positives are a burden on your organization. You'd be surprised how often the answer to 'Should we hire' has more to do with 'He felt like he would be a dick' rather than 'He doesn't know X and Y technology'.
My experience (as an applicant) was similar. Google, of course, has so many qualified applicants that oddities like this don't really matter much in terms of their final pool. I do wonder, though, if they will eventually accumulate a reputation for this sort of thing that might harm them. For myself, I no longer respond to their emails either.
My understanding of Google is that they're ok with false negatives because they consider false positives to be far far worse.
This sometimes results in candidates who can’t code well or engineers who badly overengineer.
That said, some of the best candidates have been from Google. Perhaps getting those best people was worth a certain percentage of what I consider borderline false positives.
Also, their ahole filter is imperfect. Just as with algorithms, you have people gaming the not an ahole filter.
Of course, there may not be a lot of demand for recruiters who would not be willing to tell a candidate that they're sure they'll get the offer beforehand...
I haven't had a reference check in a long time. The last company that asked for them didn't even check them. Any hiring people out there feel that reference checks provide any meaningful insight?
I got called, sang his praises only to be asked, "Are you looking for any opportunities ..."
Recruiting off the reference list is a shitty thing to do.
> Google was his number one choice, but he had to decide whether it was safe to reject the other offers he had. He started to press me more, “Jose, I need certainty. I need to know that I’m going to get this offer.” So I said, “Look, I’m sure you’re going to get the offer. My recommendation is that you wait.” The candidate learned a very valuable lesson: Never believe any assurances that the recruiter gives you about…
I believe she was Jewish and she said this in a fairly congenial way, but nonetheless I was somewhat shocked. I then thought "well gee, guess I'm going to get an offer". Nope -- more recruiter BS about headcount, whether they had the budget, etc. and the finally a "not a good fit at this time" call with no other feedback.
Their interview process is terrible for candidates and seems nearly designed to make the 90% of people they jerk around before saying no to believe all the stereotypes that Googlers are all self-entitled, aloof, 1%-ers. (I have a number of close friends @ Google, but geez the organization seems to practically revel in opportunities to make itself look bad and the hiring process makes it look sooo bad).