3 ms·
I used to think that, but honestly after recently going through a job search I think it's untenable for most scenarios. As a candidate, I want to be able to int
by morgante 9y ago
I used to think that, but honestly after recently going through a job search I think it's untenable for most scenarios. As a candidate, I want to be able to interview with multiple companies simultaneously—if I had to do a trial week with each company, I'd never be able to get multiple parallel offers.
There's also significant onboarding complexity which I hadn't factored in. One company had me do a trial period and it took me half a day to get productive—time which is a sunk cost for them (since they had to pay for it) and made me feel bad about my lack of productivity. In the same time period it took to onboard with their codebase/build tools, I could have easily completed a full interview loop with another company.
- sillysaurus3 9y agoTrue enough, but it sounds like the above model isn't for you. It's for everyone who is talented but doesn't have the option to go interview with multiple companies simultaneously. Most devs are in that position. I'd much rather commit to a single company that I want to work at and do this process to put me ahead of the other candidates. But that's not a decision that everyone feels the same about.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- readittwice 9y agoI get your sentiment. But this is quite problematic if you already have a job. It's not so easy to take a week or month off on short notice. What happens if you don't get your dream job? You can't just quit your current job.
- TomK32 9y agopair programming should cut the startup time.
- morgante 9y agoIt would also substantially increase the cost of this interviewing method.