• she/her

Principal engineer at Mercury. I've authored the Dhall configuration language, the Haskell for all blog, and countless packages and keynote presentations.

I'm a midwife to the hidden beauty in everything.

đź’– @wiredaemon


discord
Gabriella439
discord server
discord.gg/XS5ZDZ8nnp
location
bay area
private page
cohost.org/newmoon

fullmoon
@fullmoon

… is that you only need to administer one technical interview and one non-technical interview (each no more than an hour long).

In my opinion, any interview process longer than that is not only unnecessary but counterproductive.

Obviously, this streamlined interview process is easier and less time-consuming to administer, but there are other benefits that might not be obvious.


fullmoon
@fullmoon

the funniest part about the comments on social media is that half the replies are "this is not a spicy take at all" and the other half are "you're naive OP"


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @fullmoon's post:

This correlates with my experience too. The company I worked at who was worst at hiring was Apple (12+ interviewers over 6+ hours, after which every candidate was indistinguishable mush)

My general theory is I need to learn three things:

  • do they know something about the stuff they’re purporting to, (least important)
  • can they communicate and discuss their knowledge clearly and efficiently,
  • when they don’t know something, how do they react? (most important)

None of that takes more than 90min, tops. An hour is usually fine.

An unfortunate additional factor we've had to add: make sure at least one of the interviewers is a woman (fortunately, we have a few on the team to spread this job around), as a "will the candidate tend to creep women out or automatically be condescending to them" check.