3 ms·
I think I only ever interviewed and worked in big tech companies that recruits candidates at global scale. When interviewing a candidate, we try to avoid bias a
by yodsanklai 4y ago
I think I only ever interviewed and worked in big tech companies that recruits candidates at global scale. When interviewing a candidate, we try to avoid bias and pick objective signals. Whether their past projects got canceled is the type of things we actively don't want to know about. But now I suppose that in companies with smaller pools of local candidates, this type of information can make a difference.
- ChuckMcM 4y agoThat is great. Does your company ever use third party recruiters (aka "head hunters")? If so, how do you structure your recruiting contract with them so that you avoid bias and use objective signals? I'm wondering what language one could put in such a contract. I'm imagining something like this: "Recruiter will supply all sources of information consulted prior to offering candidate for consideration, if it is discovered that undisclosed sources were used, recruiter agrees to forfeit their fee."
- yodsanklai 4y agoI don't think we do. The modus operandi is to cast a wide net, interview any potential candidate that have at least some chance to pass the technical interviews (based on resume or referral, recruiters don't dig very deep). Pre-screener is 1-2 coding interviews, then if ok, on-site interviews. I believe lots of big tech companies, including FAANGs, proceed this way.
- ChuckMcM 4y agoFair enough. My experience is that contract recruiters will not even pass pre-screen candidates that they "hear negative scuttlebutt about". I understand it, they want to send candidates with what they think are the most likely to be hired, and my experience is that the recruiters understanding of "likely" may unconsciously bias them. Employed on site recruiters you can have a good conversation with and say "Even if you hear they are not good, if they check the boxes on where we're looking I would like to review." Which, given they are evaluated by candidates delivered rather than candidates hired, works out.