3 ms·
When you have a large enough number of qualified candidates, you look for any reason you can to justify why you picked one person over everyone else. Assuming
by zhdc1 5y ago
When you have a large enough number of qualified candidates, you look for any reason you can to justify why you picked one person over everyone else.
Assuming that the hire wasn't already pre-selected (which is very possible), you were likely given the quickest answer the interviewer could come up with that sounded reasonable.
- Twisol 5y agoFriends have suggested much the same, yeah. It feels unlikely due to a few factors, but I'm very willing to chalk that up to naivete on my part. (If nothing else, it's a convenient fiction that allows one to move on.)
- JohnBooty 5y agoWhen you have a large enough number of qualified candidates, you look for any reason you can to justify why you picked one person over everyone else. Yes. Also, a lot of companies operate under the principle of, "It's better to turn away ten good engineers than hire one bad one."
- mcv 5y agoThat only makes sense if you have more than enough engineers already. If not, it would be better to hire 10 good engineers and the 1 bad one, and fire the bad or or at least not extend their contract. Then you'll still have the 10 good ones. And doing actual work is a much better test of an engineer's abilities than any interview process is capable of.
- zhdc1 5y ago> Yes. Also, a lot of companies operate under the principle of, "It's better to turn away ten good engineers than hire one bad one." I wonder how successful they are at this. There is no way to have a 100% hiring success rate, and the benefits from hiring ten good engineers should strongly outweigh the impact of hiring one bad one.