7 ms·
I’ve been stuck in the final SVP approval part of their hiring process for a week. At this point I think I’m just going to keep my current job. Too bad — seemed
by a1pulley 6y ago
I’ve been stuck in the final SVP approval part of their hiring process for a week. At this point I think I’m just going to keep my current job. Too bad — seemed like a good time to get equity at a good “strike” price
- jdm2212 6y agoFWIW Google hiring is just generally really slow. Give it a few more days.
- Analemma_ 6y agoI think everybody who interviews at Google gets “stuck in the final process for a week”. That’s kinda how they do things. I interviewed there and they rejected me at the final stage after many days of no-communication; but they told me I almost made it, which made me feel good until I talked to other people and found out they say that to everyone. Still: best of luck to you :)
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 6y agoIf you made it to the full slate of interviews, you're already in the 1% of top applicants. If you made it through to hiring committee submission as well, you were very close to getting hired (they don't even try otherwise) and they're serious if they suggest you try again later.
- o10449366 6y agoGoogle has a notoriously slow hiring process. For new grads and internships, the time between initial coding assessment to final hiring confirmation is often several months.
- drdeadringer 6y agoThey've been slow on "poaching" experienced folks as well. One person I know was offered a king's ransom to switch to Google, refused a "please stay" premium from the home company, and it still took half a year to walk through the door.
- nilkn 6y agoA friend interviewed with Google a few years ago and the process took well over six months before he actually got an official offer. It really is amazing how slow they are.
- solresol 6y agoMy story: first contact December 2005, started work October 2006.
- smcameron 6y agoMy story: Interviewed October 2014, they wanted me to start December 2014, I pushed them to Jan 2015. My friend interviewed a week or two after me, started 1 week after me.
- mkoryak 6y agoCounter point: The time between my on site interview and hire date was 1 month and 1 day. I skipped the phone interview so the time from initial referral to offer was under a month. Having an internal reference may have helped, as did the fact that I told them I was actively interviewing and had offers.
- seanmcdirmid 6y agoSimilar experience here. Having internal references seems to be very useful, not just for skipping the phone interview but for getting through the hiring committee. My start day is exactly one month after my interview, but even then that is because I put it back a week.
- 6y ago
- seanmcdirmid 6y agoI purposely delayed my interview despite recruiter encouragement to get it over with, but I interviewed on March 20th, I was hired on the 30th (I think, it was in the week after the interview, I team matched by the end of the week), and I will onboard (unless something bad happens) next Monday. I’ve found Google to be much faster than I thought.
- raphlinus 6y agoCongrats! Enjoy your time there. There's lots of good people, including some programming language luminaries.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- sytelus 6y agoOne has to think why the concept of employment is still considered like marriage that require such an extensive ultra-deep multi-level deliberations. Let's say you were local, why it shouldn't be possible to give someone on-the spot offer after half-day of interviews as well as let them go with, say 2 weeks of standard severance if things don't work out?
- gnarbarian 6y agoBringing someone up to speed in a large complicated ecosystem is extremely expensive. They will have to invest months into you before you will be capable of contributing in a way that isn't a net loss and a drag on existing team members. At worst you pose a massive threat to the company/codebase. LOL i accidentally leaked all our secrets to china/apple/MS whoops.
- sytelus 6y agoBut most of these companies/teams already employ massive numbers of contractors. They typically sign NDAs and often work on same code. I've been on development teams which had contractors as 20% or more members. We had just couple of interviews and next-day offers for contractors while full timers went through multi-month process. Both worked on same code, often similarly complex tasks and used same on-boarding docs etc. One difference was that full timers were given more longer term tasks although, looking back, I feel many longer tasks simply became longer term because of tribal knowledge full timers developed and kept to themselves. The contractors were required to extensively document everything all the time :).
- dodobirdlord 6y agoAt a large technology company with its own software stack it takes several months before a new hire isn’t a net-negative to the team they join. And it will be months after that before they reach full productivity. A bad hire is an extremely expensive mistake.
- sytelus 6y agoA bad hires are expensive mistake if you can't get rid of them until some artificial annual event. While I understand onboarding complexities, my experience is that the teams/companies which hasn't create good automated process so new hire can commit their first change within 2-days are big red flag (this was insisted upon by Zuck extensively at Facebook scale). I would also argue that culture of hire/replace team members in agile manner would help enforce this process more naturally and vice versa.
- jedberg 6y agoYep, we took advantage of that at Netflix. Our average time from first contact to walking in the door was about two weeks if you wanted to move as quickly as we did. We got a few folks who were in the final stage at Google, and we contacted them, interviewed them, made the offer, and got them in the door before Google ever got back to them.
- GhostVII 6y agoPretty much all of my University friends got into team matching at Google for an internship position (myself included). All of them would have taken the job, and none of them were able to because the process was too long. It's pretty absurd, they even set up a call with myself and a dozen other people in team matching to basically tell us that we should take any other offers we have because Google is too slow. And then for full time it was the same thing - my time from application to on-site to offer was like 2 weeks for Jane Street, why is it 3 months for Google? The worst was that the deadline kept getting pushed back - for a month, I was told that I would be matched with a team that week, and I never actually got matched before my other offer deadlines.
- aparc123 6y agoIf you are past team matching phase then it is likely that you would get an offer. Note: I don't represent Google.
- paxys 6y agoI was one of the "special" ones who didn't make it past Google's final hiring committee review (although I now suspect this is a lot more common than they let on). And that happened after the recruiter had already called to check my references, matched me with a team, given me a verbal offer and told me it was "basically" final. The entire process took over 3 months. It has been years but I'm still annoyed by how they wasted my time.
- spunker540 6y agoSame thing happened with me -- I wouldn't quite go as far as receiving a verbal offer, but had been discussing compensation and they were asking about my other offers to send off to the comp team after I matched with a team. Such a long, drawn out process to come up with nothing.
- syncerr 6y agoAs a note, there’s another compensation review that takes place after hiring committee.
- jyrkesh 6y agoYeah, I was brought back after the final interview to do another round and was verbally told by the recruiter that everything looked great and that she would be extremely surprised if I didn't get an offer. Guess who got to tell me I didn't get it (again)? Note to recruiters: don't say that stuff. Fortunately, I'm still happy in my current job.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 6y agoBeing brought back to do another interview is not a good sign at Google. Best case is your interviewers totally forgot to cover something important, but more commonly it means somebody has serious doubts about something and they need to check it again.
- dvirsky 6y agoYou might be okay, time to reach out to your recruiter.
- a1pulley 6y agoI did — she said, paraphrased, "I wouldn't blame you if you took another offer. I have no idea how long it will take in light of today's memo"
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- droithomme 6y agoYou dodged a bullet.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 6y agoThe bullet of getting hired by a company with famously large margins and a huge pile of cash? I could think of worse places to be during this crisis.
- quickthrower2 6y agoA silver bullet?
- xwdv 6y agoThere’s better companies IMO.
- Nicksil 6y agoIs it surprising that some people may value things other than just money? Of course there are people who would decide against an opportunity to go work for Google, FaceBook, Twitter, et al. I like to think there are more than a few, but I've no sources to backup any assertions right now.
- fuckface123 6y agoYes
- TulliusCicero 6y agoHow is that relevant in the least to someone who applied for a job there?
- Nicksil 6y agoI don't understand your question. Did you read the post I was replying to? That may add missing context.
- 6y ago
- formercoder 6y agoI was rejected by an SVP at Google. Recruiter was surprised but said it happens. Said I did a good job and could pick a different role (wasn’t for SWE), got the offer the second time around but had to start all over and got passed to a new recruiter.
- illumin8 6y agoHow does that happen? The way interviewing should work is that every person that interviewed you should vote, and if its unanimous that you should be hired, then some SVP a few levels up decided to veto it, I'd be livid if I was a hiring manager.
- freepor 6y agoExecs veto decisions lower down all the time, for good and bad reasons. If you don’t like it, get yourself promoted.
- illumin8 6y agoThey are free to do so, but when they do it for arbitrary reasons, it instills a lack of trust in leadership. Leaders that lead through fear are much less effective than leaders that are able to motivate their followers in positive ways.
- refurb 6y agoYeah, that screams micromanagement. If you so lack in trust that the people on your team can make good hiring decisions, even to the point of rejecting somebody you haven’t actually met...well... that’s just nuts.
- mattzito 6y agoSo, your described situation almost never happens. There are candidates who get 100% hire votes, and they get hired. Most candidates have some variability- it is rare that everyone is 100% onboard. The svp review is to make sure that the hiring process has worked and nothing major has been missed.
- daleco 6y agoI’m also stuck at the SVP approval since 8 days...
- AlexCoventry 6y agoWhat's SVP?
- GhettoChild 6y agoSenior Vice President.
- chvid 6y agoDidn’t know google had so many senior vice presidents ...
- chii 6y agojob title inflation is a thing.
- eitally 6y agoBut not at the SVP level, at least not at Google.
- cameronbrown 6y agoThey don't.
- fuckface123 6y agoVPs are a dime a dozen though
- AlexCoventry 6y agoEvery hire at google needs to be OK'd by a Senior Vice President?
- davidgay 6y agoUntil 201x (not sure exactly when it changed), every hire needed to be approved by Larry (ref both my memory and https://www.businessinsider.com/google-ceo-larry-page-on-hiring-2015-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/google-ceo-larry-page-on-hir...).
- dehrmann 6y agoIf you do get it, I'd strongly consider negotiating a severance for the risk you're taking on.
- cowmoo728 6y agoGood luck. I recently went through the google interview process and it took months. The lockdowns were starting and the economy was melting down around me, and then I myself got sick with covid-19. It was a stressful time. I had a strong preference for a position in NYC, but I decided to accept a team match in mountain view to get the offer signed asap just in case google announced a hiring freeze. Thankfully I'm very happy with the team I'm starting with. Google's process is designed for people who already work at other big tech companies who have months to kill and lots of spare cash in case it doesn't work out. It was nerve wracking for me, who had just been laid off from my job and gotten sick. I don't know what they can change about it, but I will note that the interview process at Facebook is significantly less confusing and much shorter.