4 ms·

>If somebody does not care enough to work for us to put in couple of hours of work then they are very likely not a good candidate anyway. [emphasis mine] You c

>If somebody does not care enough to work for us to put in couple of hours of work then they are very likely not a good candidate anyway. [emphasis mine] You compensate candidates for their time? I certainly assume you are compensated to interview incoming candidates, but its unusual for the candidate to be compensated (though not unheard of). I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but I also get the impression having not been on the other side of the process recently has biased your viewpoint significantly. Please correct me if I'm wrong in my assumptions / impressions.

twawaaay 4y ago
Interviewing is a mutual process. The company invests time and resources into finding employees and candidates invest time and resources into finding a good place for them to work. I see no reason to compensate the candidate for the time they spend on interviewing and when companies do this I see it as a desperate marketing gimmick. Now, I assume all is done honestly. I put up an honest job offer, I explain the interviewing process upfront, I try not to waste candidate's time and certainly I do not ask people to do any take home exercises. And since I started to do all interviewing remotely there is even less cost to the candidate -- basically they only need to spend couple of hours on interview alone and no travel. I also try to put largest filters at the beginning of the process so that if you pass first interview it means you are likely on a good path to get the job. This works both ways, incidentally -- as I would prefer to spend more time with candidates that are promising.
- flutas 4y ago
  Do you interview one single person at a time for the job? That's what has killed my desire for interviews with certain companies at times when they bring up long interviews as the next steps. If I have a company say "the next round will be 3 hours of interviews, we're going to wrap up this round on all candidates then move on" I will 100% drop the interview process and not move forward. On the other hand, if a company tells me "the next round will be 3 hours of interviews, you're currently the only candidate we are interviewing for this role" or "we're interviewing multiple people but have multiple roles open" I will gladly continue the process. (This is a question I always ask in interviews.) It essentially comes down to "why waste my time continuing with a company when the end result could be 'oh we found someone that we feel is slightly better than you, but you're our backup'". Have I given up on some jobs that would be cool? Yep, but I'm not going to waste my time with a company if they use a shotgun interview approach that will take my time and essentially turn it into a lottery system for them to pick from.

twawaaay 4y ago

Interviewing is a mutual process. The company invests time and resources into finding employees and candidates invest time and resources into finding a good place for them to work. I see no reason to compensate the candidate for the time they spend on interviewing and when companies do this I see it as a desperate marketing gimmick. Now, I assume all is done honestly. I put up an honest job offer, I explain the interviewing process upfront, I try not to waste candidate's time and certainly I do not ask people to do any take home exercises. And since I started to do all interviewing remotely there is even less cost to the candidate -- basically they only need to spend couple of hours on interview alone and no travel. I also try to put largest filters at the beginning of the process so that if you pass first interview it means you are likely on a good path to get the job. This works both ways, incidentally -- as I would prefer to spend more time with candidates that are promising.

flutas 4y ago
Do you interview one single person at a time for the job? That's what has killed my desire for interviews with certain companies at times when they bring up long interviews as the next steps. If I have a company say "the next round will be 3 hours of interviews, we're going to wrap up this round on all candidates then move on" I will 100% drop the interview process and not move forward. On the other hand, if a company tells me "the next round will be 3 hours of interviews, you're currently the only candidate we are interviewing for this role" or "we're interviewing multiple people but have multiple roles open" I will gladly continue the process. (This is a question I always ask in interviews.) It essentially comes down to "why waste my time continuing with a company when the end result could be 'oh we found someone that we feel is slightly better than you, but you're our backup'". Have I given up on some jobs that would be cool? Yep, but I'm not going to waste my time with a company if they use a shotgun interview approach that will take my time and essentially turn it into a lottery system for them to pick from.