An interview process is supposed to identify -- out of all the candidates -- the candidate which will be the most successful at the new role.
So... how successful do you think most companies are at this? From what I've read, not very. So we've read and thought a lot about this and now have a "beta" version of the what I hope will eventually become a world class hiring process. It's heavily influenced by the book "Work Rules!" which I highly recommend.
From the point of view of the candidate, there are six steps:
- Assessment #1
- Phone Call #1 (Short, ~20 minutes)
- Assessment #2
- Phone Call #2 (In-depth, 60+ minutes)
- Assessment #3
- In-Person Interview (In-depth, 2-3 hours)
Depending on the role, the "assessments" above consist of:
- Requests for samples of prior work
- Short simulated work tasks
- A few written interview questions
- Short exams/tests
During the phone calls, and the in-person interview, we ask the exactly same questions, with the same wording, to each candidate. Each question is scored by multiple people independently, and each question has a 'scoring guide' prepared in advance. In addition, all the assessments are also individually scored according to pre-established criteria.
All this is to try and eliminate bias and enforce consistency and rigor on the process. At the same time we're going to and pull it off in a friendly and fun and humanizing way, despite the structure.
We're certainly interested in any feedback you have as you move through the process!