Thread

1. jonas21 · 1790183511 · focus · HN ↗

   Every time I've hired someone at a big company, it's taken multiple months to get candidates through the pipeline, and it was not uncommon to have to go back to the candidate pool when someone would accept an offer and change their mind before starting. 90 days to fill a role would be considered relatively quick.

   1. esseph · 1790183964 · focus · HN ↗

      I am hearing from multiple people in hiring departments at different companies that they are doing 7-9 rounds of interviews for non-coding tech roles.

      These companies have lost their minds.

      1. alistairSH · 1790184982 · focus · HN ↗

         That sounds pretty insane to me.

         IME (hiring, not interviewing) it's always been 3-4 rounds. First is an HR phone screen (usually 20-30 minutes on the phone), 2nd with hiring manager, 3rd with a senior engineer/architect, and a 4th with the hiring VP. And those are almost always combined into a single morning or afternoon(2+3 or 3+4) and the final round doesn't always happen (VP's choice).

      2. gib444 · 1790186010 · focus · HN ↗

         It's just cruel

         1. pixl97 · 1790186723 · focus · HN ↗

            Maybe the cruelty is the point? They are looking for people that will put up with bullshit and suffering?

            1. whstl · 1790187812 · focus · HN ↗

               I'd say it's more incompetence than cruelty. People (edit: I mean companies) have options and don't know how to filter, so they just go nuts in the worst possible way.

               1. smcg · 1790190790 · focus · HN ↗

                  Or they don't have options and have to put up with it.

                  1. whstl · 1790191503 · focus · HN ↗

                     From the candidates point of view, that's definitely the case.
            2. gib444 · 1790193057 · focus · HN ↗

               Oh absolutely. And psychopaths enjoying inflicting the torture
      3. darth_avocado · 1790194057 · focus · HN ↗

         7-9 rounds just means 7-9 conversations. Just talking to a recruiter and the manager are 2 rounds. So 5-7 interviews that evaluate competency. You usually get the lower end unless you ended up giving mixed signals.

         Sounds like asking a lot from candidates but unfortunately candidates lie a lot and the cost of hiring candidates that don’t match up to the requirements when paying $300k-$500k/year is just too high. Firing people is hard and takes a long time, especially in management roles. My personal guidance to managers is to have rounds match the level and experience required for the job. You can hire an intern with 2 rounds after the hiring manager conversation but a staff IC probably needs 5, directors need 7.

         1. esseph · 1790196282 · focus · HN ↗

            I'm talking about 7-9 rounds for non tech companies, and each round is at least an hour plus interview. These roles aren't even hitting the $200k marker.
      4. Plasmoid · 1790194696 · focus · HN ↗

         It's an effect of "once burned twice shy". Every time there was a "bad" hire they had to change things. People add to the list but no one ever wants to advocate for a lighter process since they might be blamed for it.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.