3 ms·

> although I'd passed the interview, my interview performance was too poor to be considered for hiring. In what world of hiring would passing an interview be c

> although I'd passed the interview, my interview performance was too poor to be considered for hiring. In what world of hiring would passing an interview be considered a failing interview? If it's too poor for hire then it's a fail.

sophacles 2y ago
Interviews serve 2 functions. 1. Weeding out the people you surely don't want... that is it answers: does this candidate meet the minimum bar for working here? 2. Providing enough information about a candidate to give them a score... that is it answers: how good is this candidate? You can "pass" an interview - that is the answer to question 1 is "yes, this person meets our qualifications", but fail in question 2 under conditions where there are more qualified candidates than there are positions. It's really common actually to wait until there are a few qualified candidates before making a hiring decision, rather than just hiring the first person that meets the minimum standards. This bit of hedging allows for making better teams from the available hiring pipeline (on average anyway).
Raidion 2y ago
I've never this at Google, but at my company, if you pass the technical screen you're offered to hiring managers. If they don't want you on your team because they want more leadership (or less leadership), or if there were 5 senior python roles and you were the 6th person to pass the interviews, you still won't get hired.
- from-nibly 2y ago
  So they go through the interview process when there are no positions available. Why? Just to keep everyone one the treadmill?
  - xmprt 2y ago
    > Just to keep everyone one the treadmill Unironically yes. Although it's arguably a win-win. Google constantly keeps its pipeline of candidates open which means that if you're looking for a job and you clear the resume bar, you'll get an interview. Meanwhile teams are constantly hiring so they'll want a steady stream of candidates. The alternative would mean that unless your timing for a job search is perfect, you won't even get a foot in the door and teams within Google will also struggle to fill open positions since it would take a while to interview the candidate pool.
  - DANmode 2y ago
    It hasn't stopped working for them yet. People still line up for their purported incentives, despite these stories. Unfortunately that simple.
    - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
      > People still line up for their purported incentives, despite these stories. The reason why nerds nevertheless apply at MAANG companies is thus the same reason why "ordinary" people buy lottery tickets - nerds are not that different. :-)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
anal_reactor 2y ago
The company changed mind on how many people it wants to hire during the interview process. Of course they wouldn't admit "I just got news from the higher-ups that we're not actually hiring because shit is on fire", so they came up with some lame excuse that puts the blame on the candidate. I solved the interview question for Uber, but then there was news that Uber stops hiring company-wide. I solved the interview questions for Microsoft, but then got feedback that I didn't.

sophacles 2y ago

Interviews serve 2 functions. 1. Weeding out the people you surely don't want... that is it answers: does this candidate meet the minimum bar for working here? 2. Providing enough information about a candidate to give them a score... that is it answers: how good is this candidate? You can "pass" an interview - that is the answer to question 1 is "yes, this person meets our qualifications", but fail in question 2 under conditions where there are more qualified candidates than there are positions. It's really common actually to wait until there are a few qualified candidates before making a hiring decision, rather than just hiring the first person that meets the minimum standards. This bit of hedging allows for making better teams from the available hiring pipeline (on average anyway).

Raidion 2y ago

I've never this at Google, but at my company, if you pass the technical screen you're offered to hiring managers. If they don't want you on your team because they want more leadership (or less leadership), or if there were 5 senior python roles and you were the 6th person to pass the interviews, you still won't get hired.

from-nibly 2y ago
So they go through the interview process when there are no positions available. Why? Just to keep everyone one the treadmill?
- xmprt 2y ago
  > Just to keep everyone one the treadmill Unironically yes. Although it's arguably a win-win. Google constantly keeps its pipeline of candidates open which means that if you're looking for a job and you clear the resume bar, you'll get an interview. Meanwhile teams are constantly hiring so they'll want a steady stream of candidates. The alternative would mean that unless your timing for a job search is perfect, you won't even get a foot in the door and teams within Google will also struggle to fill open positions since it would take a while to interview the candidate pool.
- DANmode 2y ago
  It hasn't stopped working for them yet. People still line up for their purported incentives, despite these stories. Unfortunately that simple.
  - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
    > People still line up for their purported incentives, despite these stories. The reason why nerds nevertheless apply at MAANG companies is thus the same reason why "ordinary" people buy lottery tickets - nerds are not that different. :-)
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

anal_reactor 2y ago

The company changed mind on how many people it wants to hire during the interview process. Of course they wouldn't admit "I just got news from the higher-ups that we're not actually hiring because shit is on fire", so they came up with some lame excuse that puts the blame on the candidate. I solved the interview question for Uber, but then there was news that Uber stops hiring company-wide. I solved the interview questions for Microsoft, but then got feedback that I didn't.