3 ms·

So you’re testing the recruiter? The recruiter would have an answer probably no more insightful than the NYTimes. Do you ask Google recruiters about their et

So you’re testing the recruiter? The recruiter would have an answer probably no more insightful than the NYTimes. Do you ask Google recruiters about their ethics and AI? Or Apple recruiters about factories in China? Or Tesla recruiters the long term impacts of batteries on the environment? In theory all potentially fair game, but a better question might be “I’m interested in this. Can you set up a call with someone who could address my questions on it.” And once the recruiter gave an answer are you then done and ready to talk about the role? This seems like a setup more than a sincere question.

pmiller2 7y ago
It's not testing the recruiter. It's trying to get information about how the company works. That's exactly the sort of question I'd expect a recruiter to be able to answer, at some level. I would gladly accept "I don't have a really good answer for you, but I can set you up to talk to someone who does." If they don't have an answer better than the NYT, and they're willing to do that, I'd be satisfied with the recruiter on that point. As far as being ready to talk about the role, asking these questions is talking about the role, so I don't understand what you're getting at here.
- dangwu 7y ago
  The thing is, they don't have any information that you don't have access to, and they're not going to be able to set you up with anybody who does (e.g. a director, VP, or CEO). Any information they do have is already publicly available. The company has 800K+ employees and any non-executive emails leak as soon as they're sent, if not simply made public immediately. Essentially, you're testing their ability to regurgitate corporate policies, which is completely pointless.
  - pmiller2 7y ago
    If $COMPANY finds themselves losing a significant number of candidates (at least some of whom they presumably need to hire), because they can't answer $QUESTION, and that information gets reported up the chain, what do you think $COMPANY's rational response is?
    - dangwu 7y ago
      Maybe $COMPANY just expects their candidates to be able to use a search engine rather than quiz their recruiters on it, and anyone who can't do that is a non-regrettable loss.
      - pmiller2 7y ago
        And $COMPANY expects candidates to even know to ask the questions without having to do a little reading? That does not seem very rational to me.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]

pmiller2 7y ago

It's not testing the recruiter. It's trying to get information about how the company works. That's exactly the sort of question I'd expect a recruiter to be able to answer, at some level. I would gladly accept "I don't have a really good answer for you, but I can set you up to talk to someone who does." If they don't have an answer better than the NYT, and they're willing to do that, I'd be satisfied with the recruiter on that point. As far as being ready to talk about the role, asking these questions is talking about the role, so I don't understand what you're getting at here.

dangwu 7y ago
The thing is, they don't have any information that you don't have access to, and they're not going to be able to set you up with anybody who does (e.g. a director, VP, or CEO). Any information they do have is already publicly available. The company has 800K+ employees and any non-executive emails leak as soon as they're sent, if not simply made public immediately. Essentially, you're testing their ability to regurgitate corporate policies, which is completely pointless.
- pmiller2 7y ago
  If $COMPANY finds themselves losing a significant number of candidates (at least some of whom they presumably need to hire), because they can't answer $QUESTION, and that information gets reported up the chain, what do you think $COMPANY's rational response is?
  - dangwu 7y ago
    Maybe $COMPANY just expects their candidates to be able to use a search engine rather than quiz their recruiters on it, and anyone who can't do that is a non-regrettable loss.
    - pmiller2 7y ago
      And $COMPANY expects candidates to even know to ask the questions without having to do a little reading? That does not seem very rational to me.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]