3 ms·

I can see how this would be useful. On the other hand, from the perspective of a company who you might theoretically interview with... remember that running th

by jtheory 11y ago

I can see how this would be useful. On the other hand, from the perspective of a company who you might theoretically interview with... remember that running the hiring process isn't free for us. It's a much bigger deal with small companies (I'm not sure a large one would care much), but if I pick up that you actually have no interest in what we're working on, no intention of leaving your current position, and just applied to brush up your interview skills "for free", I'm going to be seriously annoyed. Maybe it doesn't matter -- if you've no intention of joining us anyway -- but it doesn't make sense to burn bridges this way. If you're genuinely interested in us, and in making the connection, though (e.g., "I'm happy where I am now, but you look like you'll be really hitting your pace just as my current company is past the exciting phase", or "I like my job, but commuting across the city is awful... how do you actually work?"), that's reasonable.

discardorama 11y ago
> from the perspective of a company who you might theoretically interview with... remember that running the hiring process isn't free for us. Neither is interviewing free for the interviewer. S/he has to take PTO to do the interview.
- jtheory 11y ago
  The interviewer makes that calculation -- is it worth taking the time, in exchange for more practice interviewing? And it may actually not be PTO; I've done plenty of remote interviews at odd hours to accommodate candidates. The company would be paying for a shot at a good new hire. Here's where my point applies -- in this case, if there's actually no chance you'd work for them, that's a trick they're not going to be happy about.
curun1r 11y ago
As someone who does a lot of hiring, I wish more engineers would do what he suggested. When interviewing candidates, it can be too easy to adjust your expectations downward after interviewing many unqualified candidates. My hunch is that so many candidates are unqualified because the ones that are actively looking for a job are predominantly the ones that aren't in demand an interview everywhere. If I can mix in qualified candidates that aren't really looking, I can better calibrate my assessment of the market for talent. Plus, with hiring being as difficult as it is, I'll spend the time interviewing to get an opportunity to sell my position and my company to a candidate, whether interested or not. It only takes changing the mind of one excellent developer to make it worthwhile for me. Additionally, networking is everything. Leaving candidates with a positive impression of my company, my team and myself is worth something, even if they don't join. Whenever I extend an offer, I also offer to connect on LinkedIn with the basic message, "I'd like to work together now, but I understand that's not always possible. Even if you take another position or stay at your current job, please feel free to check back in the future or refer any friends who are looking." Most don't accept, but some do. Even if it doesn't help me hire for my open position, there's value in having a network of people who all think they've got it better than I could offer. Whenever I'm searching for a job, my first stop is looking at the current employers of the developers I respect most from my network. Those employers are likely to be doing something exciting and I've got an in to pass my résumé along if I want to apply, even if my relationship with that "in" was only a single interview process.

by jtheory 11y ago

discardorama 11y ago

> from the perspective of a company who you might theoretically interview with... remember that running the hiring process isn't free for us. Neither is interviewing free for the interviewer. S/he has to take PTO to do the interview.

jtheory 11y ago
The interviewer makes that calculation -- is it worth taking the time, in exchange for more practice interviewing? And it may actually not be PTO; I've done plenty of remote interviews at odd hours to accommodate candidates. The company would be paying for a shot at a good new hire. Here's where my point applies -- in this case, if there's actually no chance you'd work for them, that's a trick they're not going to be happy about.

curun1r 11y ago

As someone who does a lot of hiring, I wish more engineers would do what he suggested. When interviewing candidates, it can be too easy to adjust your expectations downward after interviewing many unqualified candidates. My hunch is that so many candidates are unqualified because the ones that are actively looking for a job are predominantly the ones that aren't in demand an interview everywhere. If I can mix in qualified candidates that aren't really looking, I can better calibrate my assessment of the market for talent. Plus, with hiring being as difficult as it is, I'll spend the time interviewing to get an opportunity to sell my position and my company to a candidate, whether interested or not. It only takes changing the mind of one excellent developer to make it worthwhile for me. Additionally, networking is everything. Leaving candidates with a positive impression of my company, my team and myself is worth something, even if they don't join. Whenever I extend an offer, I also offer to connect on LinkedIn with the basic message, "I'd like to work together now, but I understand that's not always possible. Even if you take another position or stay at your current job, please feel free to check back in the future or refer any friends who are looking." Most don't accept, but some do. Even if it doesn't help me hire for my open position, there's value in having a network of people who all think they've got it better than I could offer. Whenever I'm searching for a job, my first stop is looking at the current employers of the developers I respect most from my network. Those employers are likely to be doing something exciting and I've got an in to pass my résumé along if I want to apply, even if my relationship with that "in" was only a single interview process.