4 ms·
Perhaps there is too much emphasis on the interview process. Why not use the contract-to-hire method? It could be a short duration spanning a few weeks. There
by mkhattab 14y ago
Perhaps there is too much emphasis on the interview process. Why not use the contract-to-hire method? It could be a short duration spanning a few weeks.
There are of course multiple drawbacks, but at least this method could help alleviate the problem of false negatives.
- jrockway 14y agoMany people don't want to be contractors. One of Google's draws is the benefits for full-time employees.
- emmapersky 14y agoIt takes many months to become a productive Engineer at Google, and in all of that time you are earning your full salary and being exposed to confidential information, so it's not realistic to try people out, as it would really only be valid after ramp up time; The challenge we face is figuring out if people will be successful here after they have picked up everything they need to know.
- Evbn 14y agoCollege interns do that. It is more awkward for industry hires.
- chollida1 14y agoThis has been covered multiple times. Good employees just won't do contract to hire. WHy give up a good job at MSFT or Goldman Sachs where you earn $150,000/year to do contract for hire for a couple of weeks with the chance you'll be out of a job? The upside is you have a job that pays about the same at a company with about the same "brand name" value, ie working at all 3 is about equivalent. The down side is you loose your job.