4 ms·
The 100 applicants are down to 10 people for an onsite, 2 or 3 get an offer, 1 is accepting it. Sometimes when I look back at the last few people I interviewed
by user5994461 6y ago
The 100 applicants are down to 10 people for an onsite, 2 or 3 get an offer, 1 is accepting it.
Sometimes when I look back at the last few people I interviewed onsite, I'm pretty sure they could all have done the job just fine. It's crazy that they're all getting rejected, there is nothing wrong with them, the company is overly picky for no reason.
Digging down there's probably 1 who got an offer and rejected it. Companies always forget to mention that half of their offers are rejected, hiring would be easier if they improved on that.
- triceratops 6y ago> Companies always forget to mention that half of their offers are rejected, hiring would be easier if they improved on that. Easier for that company, but harder for the companies they beat out.
- decafninja 6y agoSame. Pretty much every candidate we interview is more than capable of doing the job technically. Overwhelmingly, why my team picks one person for the job and reject the others is for non-technical/behavioral reasons. Then again my company is a boring investment bank, not a hot tech company. Top quality candidates are not in a rush to trample each other to join us. 90% of the candidates we get would not be able to brute force naively solve an leetcode medium or even a harder leetcode easy, let alone come up with an optimal solution. We would never be able to hire anyone if we rejected everyone that wasn't able to code an optimal solution in 40 minutes. Yet if hired, I have no doubt nearly all of them would be able to do the actual job more than well enough - and that has been the case with everyone that I've interviewed and gave the thumbs up to.