I think There is a fundamental mismatch between the signal an interview can provide and the requirements necessary to be successful on the job.
You see and interview is like a “test” or a “pop quiz” where the day to day is more like “homework”. That is, you want to hire people who do their homework, but the only reasonable method to evaluate a candidate is to give them a test. And while a “high test score” may serve as a proxy for “completes homework”, as we all know, it’s far from perfect.
The unfortunate reality is that the best process for determining the quality of a candidate benefits neither the candidate nor the company. That is some sort of paid-trial-period-type arrangement to evaluate fit.
So we are left with these gauntlets of an interview process because it kind of splits the baby…
You see and interview is like a “test” or a “pop quiz” where the day to day is more like “homework”. That is, you want to hire people who do their homework, but the only reasonable method to evaluate a candidate is to give them a test. And while a “high test score” may serve as a proxy for “completes homework”, as we all know, it’s far from perfect.
The unfortunate reality is that the best process for determining the quality of a candidate benefits neither the candidate nor the company. That is some sort of paid-trial-period-type arrangement to evaluate fit.
So we are left with these gauntlets of an interview process because it kind of splits the baby…