3 ms·

You can keep asking the question in other ways: "How long was the person before me here?" "What's the average length of time someone stays here?" "How lo

by icey 17y ago

You can keep asking the question in other ways: "How long was the person before me here?" "What's the average length of time someone stays here?" "How long have *you* been here?" If you really want to know the answer, you just have to keep asking. Turnover rate is the first real question I ask. (Also: the lack of an answer is an answer on its own.)

pw0ncakes 17y ago
Mentioning a "person before me" in an interview is a bad idea, because it brings forth associations you might not want. Also, there might not be such a person. The second and third questions are good, but short tenures could also signify a rapidly growing company (which is something to be wary of, but not for the same reason) like Google in 2006.
- mendriacus 17y ago
  "short tenures could also signify a rapidly growing company" Sure, but if everyone interviewing you are less than a year in, where are all the people who worked here before? And why are you being interviewed mostly or exclusively by junior team members who haven't proved themselves yet? Is the company entrusting the selection of successful employees to newbies who haven't yet proved they can be such? An interviewer for a company in the middle of a growth spurt should be able to explain that, quote some enticing growth figures, and mention that "almost all of the original team members are now project leaders and executives... in fact, if this goes well, you'll meet some of them shortly".
mendriacus 17y ago
The beauty of that last one is how there's absolutely no way to fluff it away. You're asking for a number. Your interviewer either gives it to you, or he evades. Another brilliant one is "how long are you planning to stay?". This can lead to some of the most revealing and unstructured discussions you'll engage in during your interview process. Not for the feint of heart.
jparise 17y ago
Just be careful to interpret the answers to those questions in context. If a small company is growing or expanding into new areas or technologies, I wouldn't necessarily consider it a bad thing if the answers to the second two questions were short periods of time. For example, if you join a small company to lead, say, their first Android application's development, and one of your first tasks involves hiring another developer or two to round out your team, there's not going to be a lot of tenure there. That certainly represents a risk, but it doesn't indicate something wrong with the company. When I encounter situations like this, I often ask about the team members' prior experience. They're not obliged to share those details, of course, but most people are eager to tell you about their past achievements and how they hope to outdo themselves in their new roles.

by icey 17y ago

pw0ncakes 17y ago

Mentioning a "person before me" in an interview is a bad idea, because it brings forth associations you might not want. Also, there might not be such a person. The second and third questions are good, but short tenures could also signify a rapidly growing company (which is something to be wary of, but not for the same reason) like Google in 2006.

mendriacus 17y ago
"short tenures could also signify a rapidly growing company" Sure, but if everyone interviewing you are less than a year in, where are all the people who worked here before? And why are you being interviewed mostly or exclusively by junior team members who haven't proved themselves yet? Is the company entrusting the selection of successful employees to newbies who haven't yet proved they can be such? An interviewer for a company in the middle of a growth spurt should be able to explain that, quote some enticing growth figures, and mention that "almost all of the original team members are now project leaders and executives... in fact, if this goes well, you'll meet some of them shortly".

mendriacus 17y ago

The beauty of that last one is how there's absolutely no way to fluff it away. You're asking for a number. Your interviewer either gives it to you, or he evades. Another brilliant one is "how long are you planning to stay?". This can lead to some of the most revealing and unstructured discussions you'll engage in during your interview process. Not for the feint of heart.

jparise 17y ago

Just be careful to interpret the answers to those questions in context. If a small company is growing or expanding into new areas or technologies, I wouldn't necessarily consider it a bad thing if the answers to the second two questions were short periods of time. For example, if you join a small company to lead, say, their first Android application's development, and one of your first tasks involves hiring another developer or two to round out your team, there's not going to be a lot of tenure there. That certainly represents a risk, but it doesn't indicate something wrong with the company. When I encounter situations like this, I often ask about the team members' prior experience. They're not obliged to share those details, of course, but most people are eager to tell you about their past achievements and how they hope to outdo themselves in their new roles.