3 ms·
>The CEO must be personally involved in the first 150 hires. Is this a typo? Should it have read 'first 15 hires' because 'first 150' is absolute nonsense.
by Peroni 12y ago
>The CEO must be personally involved in the first 150 hires.
Is this a typo? Should it have read 'first 15 hires' because 'first 150' is absolute nonsense.
- jonnathanson 12y agoIn fairness, it really depends on the CEO's level of involvement in those hires. If the CEO is taking time out of the day to interview each of the first 150, that might be inefficient (or it might not be, depending upon the length of time during which those 150 were hired). On the other hand, if the CEO merely has to give a thumbs up or final approval to anyone who's made it through the gauntlet, that seems like a more modest timesuck.
- Peroni 12y agoModest yes but also completely unnecessary. If the CEO hasn't spent one-on-one time with the applicant then they shouldn't be the one holding the final decision.
- boling11 12y agoThis seems doable if the CEO is the final interview. I can't imagine the CEO overriding the team on more than 30% of interviews, so it's ~200 interviews on the high end. I know the Palantir founders still interview every candidate and they seem to be doing fine.