Hiring is an incredibly difficult problem to solve at any scale, though it's different on different scales. As times goes on my impression of how hard the task

Hiring is an incredibly difficult problem to solve at any scale, though it's different on different scales. As times goes on my impression of how hard the task is keeps shifting upwards. It's a huge deal for both parties. I think that if there is a way to spend money and/or time to solve it, both sides can come out on top with room to spare. There's plenty of evidence that both sides are willing to invest a lot in it. For employers that's easily measurable in fees they pay for recruiting services (which usually suck), for referrals and such. For Applicants, it's harder to say. But, people do whole degrees and certifications in order to appeal to employees. Often that stuff is at a total tangent to acquiring useful skills or pursuing interest. It's basically time an money invested in being (more easily) hirable. Basically, anything that can improve hiring meaningfully may be worth this kind of big investment for an employee as well as an employer. One way it could pay off is higher salary. A higher quality, de-risked hire is worth more. I think one of the things that rely needs to happen though is that applicants need to be able to evaluate their chances. Spending 3 days interviewing may be no big deal in the context of a job that will last 3 years, but it is in the context of some unknowable probability of getting said job. A third party would probably be helpful here.