3 ms·

This is not a South African thing :) The written interview serves multiple purposes. First, it is a response to a massive flow of applications. We can more fu

This is not a South African thing :) The written interview serves multiple purposes. First, it is a response to a massive flow of applications. We can more fully and fairly assess those who show they are willing to do some work to be part of our company. Second, it helps address bias. The written interview is not a resume, which a hiring manager would read through bias like "I recognise that university" and "I like that country". The written interview is anonymous work, which can be assessed more objectively. We get it assessed, twice, anonymously, in the common case. For my roles, more than 100 people at the company help me with this, and I'm grateful to them for the work they do. Third, it helps us focus our resources. We have very light resume screening requirements - be a plausible candidate from somewhere in the world - but we spend a LOT of time on the written interview, and interviews. So for those candidates who show they care, they have insights, and they are quick on the uptake, we can spend a lot more time on them. Fourth, it helps avoid repetition. We can share a written interview with interviewers later in the process, and they get a lot of context on the candidate very quickly. They don't always read it before meeting the candidate, but they can and they should.

valdiorn 4y ago
I'm sorry Mark, but you are also indirectly selecting for candidates that: * Have ample time to write multi-page essays about themselves. Quality candidates are in demand, with multiple offers or solicitations for interview all the time. * Feel comfortable sharing fairly intimate details about themselves and their lives - I personally would never, ever want to share some childhood trauma stories with my potential future colleagues, or complete strangers. * Are willing to put up with ridiculous, time-wasting tasks - maybe you want this, because these employees will be more easily managed and manipulated, but just understand you ARE selecting for it, whether you intend to or not. * Have a personality that you personally, or someone at your company, has decided is "an acceptable fit", thus missing out on a wide variety of potential candidates that might offer qualities you never even thought to test for. It all seems very misguided, and that's the reason why there have been numerous posts both here on Hacker News, Reddit and other forums on the internet, lambasting your process. It's broken, and most people outside your company seem to realise this, while you do not.

valdiorn 4y ago

I'm sorry Mark, but you are also indirectly selecting for candidates that: * Have ample time to write multi-page essays about themselves. Quality candidates are in demand, with multiple offers or solicitations for interview all the time. * Feel comfortable sharing fairly intimate details about themselves and their lives - I personally would never, ever want to share some childhood trauma stories with my potential future colleagues, or complete strangers. * Are willing to put up with ridiculous, time-wasting tasks - maybe you want this, because these employees will be more easily managed and manipulated, but just understand you ARE selecting for it, whether you intend to or not. * Have a personality that you personally, or someone at your company, has decided is "an acceptable fit", thus missing out on a wide variety of potential candidates that might offer qualities you never even thought to test for. It all seems very misguided, and that's the reason why there have been numerous posts both here on Hacker News, Reddit and other forums on the internet, lambasting your process. It's broken, and most people outside your company seem to realise this, while you do not.