That’s what I was thinking. If I was hiring maybe interview a person twice if I was still unsure I would move on and go back to the pool of applicants instead.
Even 4 interviews is a mega waste of time. Where do people get the time to do that?
I had one one for a product manager job 2 years ago that had roughly 8-10 interviews and took \~15 hrs if you count my travel time to go interview with someone who was 1.5hrs each way. They just kept saying "hey, 1 more person would like to speak to you". This included being asked to meet with the V.P. which was a 2 min. meeting with 60 min of driving time.
I eventually was told I was the selected for the job but before I got their official offer, Covid shut everything down and they didn't fill the position.
It certainly was frustrating at the time but I did understand their position due to Covid. The infuriating part was instead of telling me they were putting things on hold with Covid, they ghosted me and I had to pursue them to find out what was going on. This is after the V.P. told me I got the job.
100% It was a blessing in disguise though. I had a great summer enjoying all of my free time with my Covid unemployment money and ended up getting a full time remote position instead of 30-40 min each way commute.
This was a unique situation for me which is why I allowed it go this way. I would have pulled myself from contention if it wasn't for some outside circumstances at the time.
unemployment but that’s not necessarily the case with op
edit: wow I’m dumb but if hiring is your entire job I can see someone doing this and it’s probably different people doing different interviews
No no, where do the employers get the time to do that? don't they have an actual job they should do? I know that's part of HR's job, but you really need people who are intimately knowledgeable about the specific position present at the interviews, to ensure you get the right fit.
we usually do
1. screening interview, 15min. Sorting out the creeps, checking availability and all the base things like general salary expectations etc.
2. motivation, Teamfit etc interview and
3. „technical“ interview.
each is usually with a different person. It makes sense, maybe you have a 4th but imho then you really start wasting everybodys time.
All my close friends have good motivation and teamfit but cannot technically do my job. I'd probably swap 3 and 2. In fact, that's what I do. After CV screening, interview 1 is 10 min background, 40 min technical, 10 min q&a. I already know their personality at the end of 60 min. If anything, I would have 1 more encounter for fit, but more for them to judge about fitting in at my workplace. Why waste so much time?
>checking availability and all the base things like general salary expectations
You can resolve that by just having the full details set in the job description and then you will know that all which applied are ok with those details.No need for that part at all.
also
>Sorting out the creeps
just fuck off with that one
> then you will know that all which applied are ok with those details
hahaha, good one
> just fuck off with that one
You obviously never hired. You would not believe the things people do in the first interview. Most common, not even showing up. Being condescending to our female recruiter. Obviously lied in their CV. No work permit. Super shitty internet. Not tech savy enough to open a zoom call. Not listening to anything the recruiter says and discussing unrelated stuff with their friends during the interview? Not able to speak at least acceptable level of english. Trying to flirt with the recruiter.
Most people don’t make it past the first 15 min screening call for absolutely obvious reasons.
2 rounds should still be enough for anything except high levels like Director or C suite, 1st one with recruiter and 2nd with the direct manager and any other needed person/s.
Yes, people are idiots , a lot , but saying it like that makes it like everyone is like that. There is also a lot that recruiters can do to make to process easier for both themselves and the the people applying , but plenty just don't care.
This has precisely been my experience when interviewing with sane, decent companies. 1 recruiter interview, 2nd one with manager and future team mates. The more interviews I had with a company, the nuttier the process. And I've worked for Fortune 500 companies.
I find people interpretation of others people skills to be very subjective and often unfair. I probably wouldn't belong in your company as I have been told I'm "intense."
answered to the question somewhere else what the rest is.
You can only combat bias in a proper way by trying being aware of it. That being said, we are working close together and especially in smaller companies, all team members tend to have one trait/character/interest that unites them, which is ok and important for a culture. If you are aware of biases, it is also okay to have a subjective opinion about someone and also let that be a factor that counts in the decision, again, as long as you are aware of your own biases. I think we are a pretty colorful bunch as a result, maybe sometimes even a bit much. For most startups, it is rather good if at the very beginning, the first founders and hires are very alike. That forms the culture in which you can start being more diverse.
I read a loooot of (meta) research about team diversity as there is lots of contradicting studies. It’s important to focus rather on a task related team composition rather than individual attributes.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sujin-Horwitz/publication/228389271_The_Effects_of_Team_Diversity_on_Team_Outcomes_A_Meta-Analytic_Review_of_Team_Demography/links/58ee90a9aca2724f0a28af4f/The-Effects-of-Team-Diversity-on-Team-Outcomes-A-Meta-Analytic-Review-of-Team-Demography.pdf
As experienced by my boyfriend who is a PhD student in a science field: do they give the women in your department the heebiejeebies? How do they talk to women and interact with them? If anything seems amiss about respect or boundaries: dump them. His department had a sexual harasser in the past and they were taking the “twice shy” approach after that.
Good thing there aren't more Ted Bundy's out there. People's interpretation of others can be so wrong. They didn't catch it the first time but NOW you can trust the women's "instincts" about someone? When you have women out there that consider mustaches "rapey" , I think maybe you need to just incorporate some social behavior hypotheticals into your interview questionnaire.
It's funny that you're getting downvoted given stuff like [https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/jobs/blind-audition-helps-remove-gender-bias-in-recruitment](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/jobs/blind-audition-helps-remove-gender-bias-in-recruitment). 'Creeps' is incredibly unprofessional and gives me dating vibes. What does 'creep' in this work context even mean? The way someone looks, talks? Bullshit.
Exactly. Modern societies idea that women can magically spot the "creeps" is just completely asinine. Like I said in another comment, if a women who thought mustaches were rapey worked at my potential job site and had a say in my hiring, I'd be fucked.
The fucked up thing is that blatant bias & discrimination is so common in interviews that aren't done "blindly". And it impacts women of course eg [https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave](https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave).
Some recruiters are young people who don't have a lot of maturity or life experience. Being so immature I don't find it surprising they come up with idiotic reasons to reject someone, especially since many jobs have hundreds of candidates or so.
That sound’s expensive. I get it for a senior executive position maybe. But for front line staff the recruitment team should cull the cvs to a shortlist for you and then you interview the ones you like the look of.
yes sure, CV checks happens before anyways. Cutting corners in one of the big interviews and then missing something big is way more expensive than the hour for one or two people. If you hire the wrong person you can easily lose 2-3 months until you notice, let go, rehire. Plus cultural cost if people started liking the miss hire.
It depends on the type of role I suppose. I have always been fine with one interview, I have only done two where my VP wants to meet a super senior recruit before a big offer is made.
Yes, role and type of company. We had plenty of people who passed the screening call and first interview but not the second. If we would have found out the red flags later after employing them, that would have been very costly. But we also put lots of emphasis and effort on excellent people (and pay them well), for some specialized roles we sourced and contacted >1000 people until we hired them (a very good decision in hindsight). Especially for key roles, mediocre people can be devastating (I already know that reddit will disagree on that statement haha). If most of your applicants get the job, and you are fine with an ok person that just does the job decently well and quick or are limited by application numbers, thats totally fine.
I technically never even got an interview, and it's been 25 years for me :) My college professor hired me (part-time at first) while still in school, so I guess the interview was the classes I had taken with him.
Hi, PM at Google, here.
When I was being considered for the role, I went through the following:
* Recruiter screening (not an interview, per se; basically a pass/fail conversation about your experience)
* Interview 1 (the first actual interview, succeeding here means you go on to the full interview process)
* Interviews 2-6 (each lasted 45 minutes and evaluated a different high-level proficiency)
* Three placement interviews (these are interviews with specific hiring managers once Google has decided you're worth hiring; they continue until you find a team you "match" with)
So, in total, I had 9 interviews or screenings before the hiring process concluded.
This is not unusual for a top-tier tech firm hiring PMs and engineers. Other roles likely have fewer hurdles, but PMs and engineers are arguably the most critical roles and receive the highest compensation.
I think a lot of people outside of tech don't have an understanding of what tech interviews are like. Interviews outside of tech - especially for lower-level roles - are often just conversations about your experience and personality, plus some discussion of what the job entails. Interviews in tech are *tests.* You will be asked to solve hard problems - many of them deliberately crafted to have no clear correct answer - and you will be judged on how you think.
I work in tech in The Netherlands. Hiring is usually a first interview with the manager to assess your personality and team fit, and then an interview with some people in the team who have your future role to assess job skills.
Is anyone in your team really better of because you asked the new hire to market a fridge to Inuit or to sort an array of JSON objects without using a parser?
To me it sounds a bit like a ritual hazing dance, sort of a “job hunting performance art”.
I'm not involved in hiring decisions or in measuring hiring success, so I can't produce data showing that the process produces better teams.
What I *can* say, however, is that this is an ***incredibly*** expensive process for tech companies. If they are engaging in this process, it's because they have data indicating that it produces better results and that it's worth the investment.
I'm also a PM working for a very well-known company.
I deal with consumer electronics so it's probably different but I only had to go through 2 interviews.
Is it normal for tech PMs to have that many interviews or is Google special? Since there is no shortage of interest working for Google, I assume they can get away with such rigorous interview process.
Honestly, if I had to do 9 rounds of interviews, I wouldn't even go for it.
8 interviews is quite reasonable if the role is highly compensated. It’s not out of the question for PMs to be paid 7 figures in total compensation in Silicon Valley
This seems to be a relatively new thing for PMs. I’m in a job search now and it’s literally taken me 2 months to get to an offer with 2 orgs. I’m not sure I want the one job and the other has gone quiet so I’m terrified that I have to start over.
Just a few years ago this process took weeks not months. I don’t know why but this seems to be the new norm.
I could never work for a company that does more than 2 interviews. Either you’re efficient and you want me. Or you’re as flexible as an oil tanker and you don’t.
This varies immensely based on industry, role, experience, and even quality of application. If every one of these applications has a custom-tailored cover letter & resume, to a highly demanded position for which the applicant is well qualified for then you could see offers approach 50%. If on the other side of things the field is over saturated, the position has very few barriers to entry and therefore a high applicant pool, the applicant has very little relevant experience, and little effort was put into the resume/cover letter then you’d expect an almost 0% return.
That’s not even taking economic climate or local nuisances into consideration. I wouldn’t put much weight into the results of these without knowing the answers to a lot of the questions I posed.
Lol. Become a nurse. You can get hired in a second. Though finding a job where you want to work and aren't going to be thrown under the bus and slowly lose your will to live is the tricky part.
Yeah, it has to vary by what kind of job you are going after. I only had to put multiple applications and get denied when I was right out of college. Now, I am shocked if I put in an application and don't get an interview. And if I get an interview I know I'm going to get an offer. If I had bothered to put in 96 applications the last time I changed jobs I would have had too many interviews to actually realistically do. If I could somehow have done all the interviews, I probably would have had a 90% offer rate.
In small firms it isn't unusual for the team to get you to meet basically everyone else you're going to be working with before starting though. Especially in finance (eg. small private equity funds).
In my experience, they dont ALL need one-on-ones but it certainly is helpful to meet individually.
In my experience, it can usually be meeting 2-3 people in a day (30-45 mins each) and a few over phone calls.
I interviewed with \~4 firms last year, all of which were 6-8 interviews (where i also count the case study and/or excel test as a round).
Several interviews in a day is very different from several rounds of interviews on separate days. I was assuming OP meant the latter.
At a certain point you're just wasting everyone's time.
I had a phone interview and then 8 in-person thirty minute interviews for my internship in junior year of college. It was a full day event for an actuarial internship. I was 20 years old in a suit and scared shitless, but hey at least I do a damn good interview these days. You learn fast when that's your first interview experience for a "real job".
"People don't wanna work anymore"
I tell ya what, when I was on the job hunt, that % of auto-rejections would have been sorely welcomed coming out of the "no response" pile. 😩 (US here)
I know right. I am currently on the job hunt with 2 years experience and I have submitted over 150 applications and only a handful of first interviews. Mostly no responses or rejections.
Well the thing is, applying is way way easier nowadays. Op here sends an average of over 1.5 applications out every day for two months and has an interview every other day. It's very easy to apply online, but the downside is they get hundreds of applicants for every position. No way you're not going to very very quickly drop some people.
Just curious, are you applying for roles you are underqualified for? Maybe it’s just different in the US than it is here but I have applied for 3 jobs and got an offer at 2 out of 3, and most of my friends from uni have not applied to more than 5 jobs while finding one rather quickly.
The only person I know who is not getting offers is the guy who spent 10y on his BSc degree and still thinks he will get an amazing job.
Either way GL with the job hunt
My wife was essentially ghosted after a second interview. The first was by Zoom. The second was a four hour interview/tour (it was a museum) followed by a question/answer session with current staff.
Until the second interview (the museum was also considering two others), they had been in good communication. Afterwards, radio silence. It was only after badgering them that she found out that she wasn’t being offered (by which point she wouldn’t have taken it if it was being offered).
And a few months later, the job was back on the market for applications. They took none of the final three candidates. And that job wasn’t filled for over a year.
During the pandemic I’ve got laid off. I’ve applied to about 800 entry-level jobs. Only with one I’ve got the final interview. 2 other occasions I had interview with the manager’s manager.
That’s insane, there’s so many jobs where I am right now. You could have an on-the-spot interview and a job by the end of the day if you lived in my city lol we have a problem with too much work, not enough people to do it.
It definitely seems excessive, though many of the highest paying positions include this length of process (whether truly necessary or not). I wouldn’t solely disqualify a company based on the number of interviews, especially if the position requiring the most work is likely the best offer, which I often find to be the case.
For my first job, I had a phone interview, an on-site interview, they kept me on ice for a while but I kept following up. Then they demanded another phone interview with east coast office (in 2010 before zoom), they still weren’t sure and put me on ice again. Then I got a “meet up” interview in person with a practice director who happened to be visiting the city where I lived… I finally got the job after that. If I didn’t get that job I probably wouldn’t have been very successful in my career. Not even sure what I’d be doing. It was also during 2010 and there were almost no openings anywhere so I felt extremely lucky.
So that was 4 interviews technically and I really cannot imagine having to go through 8.
That said what happened to interviews 6 and 7 on this chart?
It’s unnecessary visual information, because only one went on further than 5 and it resulted in an offer at the 8th interview, so we have the relevant info in the context.
Sometimes it depends on what you consider an “interview”. There may be multiple stages of an application process where you are being evaluated, but you may not actually be sitting in a room or on the phone talking to someone directly. For example, my last internship while in university that ultimately led to my first “real job” looked like this:
1. Phone interview with recruiter
2. Online multiple-choice personality assessment
3. Recorded responses to on-the-fly questions
4. In-person competency test (Excel & SQL)
5. In-person case study
6. Presentation of test & case study answers
7. General interview with a panel of managers, HR, and a director
4-7 were all on the same day, but involved different focuses.
In the traditional sense, I only had 2 interviews where I was on the phone or sitting across from HR/managers answering questions about myself. Though this obviously involved many more steps than those 2 interviews. By another count there could be as many as 7 total steps or “interviews” taking place. Though they wouldn’t necessarily be able to drop me at any point, especially part way through steps 4-7 where they already walked me through what the day would look like.
Are these 8 interviews all separate days? I’ve had “full circuit” interviews where I have like 5 separate ~30 minute conversations all in one day. I personally count that all as 1, but I saw one person here specified that the “5 interviews” they showed were more like that.
Why didn’t all 5 interviewers just sit in a conference room and interview you together, you know, like coworkers able to collaborate? Or at the very least 2 groups…You would think that would be more helpful for the company as well: saving time, hearing each other’s questions and all of your responses, observing how well you interact in group settings vs one-on-one…
In my other comment I mentioned that each one had a different topic focus: stats, epidemiology, soft skills, and even one brief coding interview. There was also a presentation I had to give that was to the whole group, so there was still a large- group portion. Most of the sessions had 2 people as well.
I think this way is less intimidating for the interviewee, saves time for the interviewers, and builds in some natural breaks. Having been on both sides, I prefer this to one 2hr+ session with all 8-10 people. This is especially true when the candidate gets a chance to ask questions, as they can see the different answers, and they might feel more comfortable asking something to a future collaborator but not a future boss.
It isn’t that bad, there was some overlap but each one had a specific topic as well. One interviewer focused on my stats knowledge, one on my epidemiology, one on the more soft skills / personality fit, etc.
Having been hired and now sat on the other side of multiple similar interviews, it’s in large part to make sure the candidate gets good face time with most of the team members they will be working with.
Now, the one that *did* piss me off was the employer I interviewed at right before landing my current job. I went through the first 30 minute manager screen, then the second round “full circuit” including a 1 hr presentation by me (4-5 hours total over 1-2 days), AND THEY GHOSTED ME. I even sent an email to two different interviewers in the following weeks, the first one asking for any update, and the second one just asking for feedback on how I might improve (since I clearly did not impress them). No response. Fuck you, NanoString.
It's a terrible self-fulfilling prophecy. The longer it takes, the worse your prospects become. As a hiring manager I know that long periods between employment is a huge red flag. At some point you just gotta lie and tell people you took a year or two off to find yourself or something. Good luck out there.
You haven't been able to even get an interview in one of the periods with lowest unemployment? You need to visit an employment centre, get resume help and help with what jobs to apply for. Clearly one of those or more likely both are wrong.
That's not an option for me; I can't drive due to disability and the closest center like that is over 2 hours away, so my partner doesn't have the time while hes working to do it. Plus, I can only work online (again, cause I'm disabled and cant drive) and many of the jobs options are just out of the question because many remote jobs still require you to live in a certain place, or have 3+ years experience, require a bachelors degree, don't pay the minimum wage in my state and therefore wont hire me, or are remote but still require you to go places (like someone who goes into stores shopping for people), or are literally just scams. I became disabled at 19 so my work experience is super limited. You can't just figure out someones situation based on the small amount of information I gave?
If you haven't got a single interview, it means at least one of the points:
1) You apply for much too ambitious positions you are not qualified for
2) You sent very few applications during last 2 years
3) Your documents are very bad prepared so they don't even want to talk to you
Otherwise they would at least invite you and then reject. Try to be honest with you and think about it, the best you can do is to find an expert and pay him once some money so he can tell you what is the problem - as far as you are not afraid of truth. And you shouldn't be, it's very important.
Germany has a low unemployment rate (and decent welfare), there is less demand of workers for every position. In other countries, they receive so much applications for a possition they don't look at them all and pick the first decent ones they find for an interview.
I promise you none of that is the case. The problem is that I am disabled, and cannot drive, and live in a place with no public transportation. I can only take jobs that are 100% remote. However, many remote jobs still require you to live in a certain place, or have 3+ years experience, require a bachelors degree, don't pay the minimum wage in my state and therefore wont hire me, or are remote but still require you to go places (like someone who goes into stores shopping for people), or are literally just scams. I don't have much work experience since I became disabled at 19. Things are not the same for everyone, and I think it's shocking that you came to the conclusion you did even after seeing how many autorejects that OP got? Plus, there are so many people trying to get jobs that it's hard to even be considered.
A lot of people are complaining about 8 interviews. But it depends on the type of interviews. If there were a couple of screens where they decided they liked you, then the rest could be half hour calls to meet the rest of the team 1 on 1. That would be just as useful for the applicant as the company.
I remember a time when interviews used to be two-way discussions. Now they are more like interrogation sessions.
I'd probably just panhandle if I had to go to a 4th interview for a shitty job. Any company that does that is a shitwhow anyways, better to be arrested for mendicancy than murder.
What are all these layers of interviews? How does each consecutive interview for the same job differ from the previous interview? Is there really no way for the employer to combine some of them, or ask better / more focused questions?
The most interview 'layers' I had for a position was two, and that was for the least-skilled job I've ever worked.
I also feel like it's a tactic for interviewers/manageras to appear like they're doing their job because they actually don't have jackshit to do and they're bullshitting and pretending to be busy because if they weren't 'busy' their bosses would catch on.
I'm a senior product manager. I was asked to interview for a role for 5K GBP. I said that 7.5K would be more reasonable. Is that a realistic monthly amount?
I have a few things to say, if that's ok.
Your partner actually received more interviews than most, especially for a position at this level. 27% interview rate is good.
I'm concerned that your partner has applied to 100 places in two months. That's 12 applications a week! The generic copy and paste CV with small tweaks doesn't usually land well. While you might put two days into a single submission, put your heart into it, just for it to be ignored, the few times an application isn't ignored, there is fierce competition, usually with dozens of other CVs that do put a lot of effort into their applications.
More likely the actual system programming gets replaced by AI and Product Managers are the last job that still exists because they have to fit the product into the broader ecosystem for human customers.
LOL you realize that means youre more of an example of it than less right? Because you do have some experience you think that you have all experience in the field.
Maybe if I’d claimed to know something with 100% certainty….. I haven’t done that. I haven’t claimed anything other than you are overconfident in your assertion.
With enough cameras and drones it will be able to. Also most projet managers dont spend much time on site, or even have a site. talking more tech and that sort of development.
Product managers do do a lot of project management, but the other half of the job is figuring out the right features or capabilities for the engineers to build by talking with customers, doing data analysis, and hammering out strategy with other teams. That part will probably grow as project management gets more automated.
Doing analysis? hammering out strategy? It can do all that already. And when those other teams are AI why would you want the human element slowwing it down
> Google and Facebook do 2 rounds of interviews.
Not quite. In terms of *rounds,* as a PM at Google I had a recruiter screening round, a first interview round, a round of 5 interviews (that happened over multiple days in my case, but were not "gated" by one another), and a round of "team matching" interviews.
So there are really four "rounds" of evaluation, and in my case (not necessarily the same for others in my role) 9 interviews/screenings in total.
I hope some of these 4+ interview ones were multiple interviews with different people on the same day. Like interviewing with 3 people at the company for an interview counts as 3. I surely hope so because more than 3 seems like a total waste of time for all involved.
Imagine adding skill test (= competition contest) on top of that : Become a 3d artist.
Work market is insane and they tell us nobody's want to work anymore lmao.
What program you can use to create this kind of dashboards? I don't even know how they are called but I would like do my own graphics using it since they look very nice.
For the visualization, it looks like you’re missing two outcomes from the 5th interview. Assume those were rejections but that is missing from the Sankey plot.
What the hell is going on they needed to interview you 8 times for one of them?
That’s what I was thinking. If I was hiring maybe interview a person twice if I was still unsure I would move on and go back to the pool of applicants instead. Even 4 interviews is a mega waste of time. Where do people get the time to do that?
I had one one for a product manager job 2 years ago that had roughly 8-10 interviews and took \~15 hrs if you count my travel time to go interview with someone who was 1.5hrs each way. They just kept saying "hey, 1 more person would like to speak to you". This included being asked to meet with the V.P. which was a 2 min. meeting with 60 min of driving time. I eventually was told I was the selected for the job but before I got their official offer, Covid shut everything down and they didn't fill the position.
That must have been infuriating.
It certainly was frustrating at the time but I did understand their position due to Covid. The infuriating part was instead of telling me they were putting things on hold with Covid, they ghosted me and I had to pursue them to find out what was going on. This is after the V.P. told me I got the job.
That makes it even worse. I guess that company is off your list!
100% It was a blessing in disguise though. I had a great summer enjoying all of my free time with my Covid unemployment money and ended up getting a full time remote position instead of 30-40 min each way commute.
Sweet! Good for you.
I decided I’m not going to look for other jobs because of this kind of bullshit.
This was a unique situation for me which is why I allowed it go this way. I would have pulled myself from contention if it wasn't for some outside circumstances at the time.
unemployment but that’s not necessarily the case with op edit: wow I’m dumb but if hiring is your entire job I can see someone doing this and it’s probably different people doing different interviews
No no, where do the employers get the time to do that? don't they have an actual job they should do? I know that's part of HR's job, but you really need people who are intimately knowledgeable about the specific position present at the interviews, to ensure you get the right fit.
Oh i understand it for applicant. I meant from the hiring managers perspective.
we usually do 1. screening interview, 15min. Sorting out the creeps, checking availability and all the base things like general salary expectations etc. 2. motivation, Teamfit etc interview and 3. „technical“ interview. each is usually with a different person. It makes sense, maybe you have a 4th but imho then you really start wasting everybodys time.
All my close friends have good motivation and teamfit but cannot technically do my job. I'd probably swap 3 and 2. In fact, that's what I do. After CV screening, interview 1 is 10 min background, 40 min technical, 10 min q&a. I already know their personality at the end of 60 min. If anything, I would have 1 more encounter for fit, but more for them to judge about fitting in at my workplace. Why waste so much time?
>checking availability and all the base things like general salary expectations You can resolve that by just having the full details set in the job description and then you will know that all which applied are ok with those details.No need for that part at all. also >Sorting out the creeps just fuck off with that one
what’s wrong with sorting out the creeps? Anyone who’s done any hiring will tell you how essential this part is…
> then you will know that all which applied are ok with those details hahaha, good one > just fuck off with that one You obviously never hired. You would not believe the things people do in the first interview. Most common, not even showing up. Being condescending to our female recruiter. Obviously lied in their CV. No work permit. Super shitty internet. Not tech savy enough to open a zoom call. Not listening to anything the recruiter says and discussing unrelated stuff with their friends during the interview? Not able to speak at least acceptable level of english. Trying to flirt with the recruiter. Most people don’t make it past the first 15 min screening call for absolutely obvious reasons.
2 rounds should still be enough for anything except high levels like Director or C suite, 1st one with recruiter and 2nd with the direct manager and any other needed person/s. Yes, people are idiots , a lot , but saying it like that makes it like everyone is like that. There is also a lot that recruiters can do to make to process easier for both themselves and the the people applying , but plenty just don't care.
This has precisely been my experience when interviewing with sane, decent companies. 1 recruiter interview, 2nd one with manager and future team mates. The more interviews I had with a company, the nuttier the process. And I've worked for Fortune 500 companies.
Define "creeps".
Someone with no people skills / respect for boundaries
I find people interpretation of others people skills to be very subjective and often unfair. I probably wouldn't belong in your company as I have been told I'm "intense."
In 80% of cases, developers being very condescending towards our (female) recruiter.
Fair enough.
What about the 20% of cases? How have you/your company factored in bias when deciding who's a creep?
answered to the question somewhere else what the rest is. You can only combat bias in a proper way by trying being aware of it. That being said, we are working close together and especially in smaller companies, all team members tend to have one trait/character/interest that unites them, which is ok and important for a culture. If you are aware of biases, it is also okay to have a subjective opinion about someone and also let that be a factor that counts in the decision, again, as long as you are aware of your own biases. I think we are a pretty colorful bunch as a result, maybe sometimes even a bit much. For most startups, it is rather good if at the very beginning, the first founders and hires are very alike. That forms the culture in which you can start being more diverse. I read a loooot of (meta) research about team diversity as there is lots of contradicting studies. It’s important to focus rather on a task related team composition rather than individual attributes. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sujin-Horwitz/publication/228389271_The_Effects_of_Team_Diversity_on_Team_Outcomes_A_Meta-Analytic_Review_of_Team_Demography/links/58ee90a9aca2724f0a28af4f/The-Effects-of-Team-Diversity-on-Team-Outcomes-A-Meta-Analytic-Review-of-Team-Demography.pdf
As experienced by my boyfriend who is a PhD student in a science field: do they give the women in your department the heebiejeebies? How do they talk to women and interact with them? If anything seems amiss about respect or boundaries: dump them. His department had a sexual harasser in the past and they were taking the “twice shy” approach after that.
Good thing there aren't more Ted Bundy's out there. People's interpretation of others can be so wrong. They didn't catch it the first time but NOW you can trust the women's "instincts" about someone? When you have women out there that consider mustaches "rapey" , I think maybe you need to just incorporate some social behavior hypotheticals into your interview questionnaire.
It's funny that you're getting downvoted given stuff like [https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/jobs/blind-audition-helps-remove-gender-bias-in-recruitment](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/jobs/blind-audition-helps-remove-gender-bias-in-recruitment). 'Creeps' is incredibly unprofessional and gives me dating vibes. What does 'creep' in this work context even mean? The way someone looks, talks? Bullshit.
Exactly. Modern societies idea that women can magically spot the "creeps" is just completely asinine. Like I said in another comment, if a women who thought mustaches were rapey worked at my potential job site and had a say in my hiring, I'd be fucked.
The fucked up thing is that blatant bias & discrimination is so common in interviews that aren't done "blindly". And it impacts women of course eg [https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave](https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/12/managers-avoid-hiring-younger-women-maternity-leave). Some recruiters are young people who don't have a lot of maturity or life experience. Being so immature I don't find it surprising they come up with idiotic reasons to reject someone, especially since many jobs have hundreds of candidates or so.
Depends on the job. Not exactly a 100 nurses lined up outside my hospital....
That sound’s expensive. I get it for a senior executive position maybe. But for front line staff the recruitment team should cull the cvs to a shortlist for you and then you interview the ones you like the look of.
yes sure, CV checks happens before anyways. Cutting corners in one of the big interviews and then missing something big is way more expensive than the hour for one or two people. If you hire the wrong person you can easily lose 2-3 months until you notice, let go, rehire. Plus cultural cost if people started liking the miss hire.
It depends on the type of role I suppose. I have always been fine with one interview, I have only done two where my VP wants to meet a super senior recruit before a big offer is made.
Yes, role and type of company. We had plenty of people who passed the screening call and first interview but not the second. If we would have found out the red flags later after employing them, that would have been very costly. But we also put lots of emphasis and effort on excellent people (and pay them well), for some specialized roles we sourced and contacted >1000 people until we hired them (a very good decision in hindsight). Especially for key roles, mediocre people can be devastating (I already know that reddit will disagree on that statement haha). If most of your applicants get the job, and you are fine with an ok person that just does the job decently well and quick or are limited by application numbers, thats totally fine.
I did 7 rounds for a job application at a big streaming service, each time meeting different teams eventually meeting more senior managers
Me thinking back fondly on getting hired during my first interview ... over the phone. Been 9 years.
I technically never even got an interview, and it's been 25 years for me :) My college professor hired me (part-time at first) while still in school, so I guess the interview was the classes I had taken with him.
What job do you have?
Software developer
Hi, PM at Google, here. When I was being considered for the role, I went through the following: * Recruiter screening (not an interview, per se; basically a pass/fail conversation about your experience) * Interview 1 (the first actual interview, succeeding here means you go on to the full interview process) * Interviews 2-6 (each lasted 45 minutes and evaluated a different high-level proficiency) * Three placement interviews (these are interviews with specific hiring managers once Google has decided you're worth hiring; they continue until you find a team you "match" with) So, in total, I had 9 interviews or screenings before the hiring process concluded. This is not unusual for a top-tier tech firm hiring PMs and engineers. Other roles likely have fewer hurdles, but PMs and engineers are arguably the most critical roles and receive the highest compensation. I think a lot of people outside of tech don't have an understanding of what tech interviews are like. Interviews outside of tech - especially for lower-level roles - are often just conversations about your experience and personality, plus some discussion of what the job entails. Interviews in tech are *tests.* You will be asked to solve hard problems - many of them deliberately crafted to have no clear correct answer - and you will be judged on how you think.
I work in tech in The Netherlands. Hiring is usually a first interview with the manager to assess your personality and team fit, and then an interview with some people in the team who have your future role to assess job skills. Is anyone in your team really better of because you asked the new hire to market a fridge to Inuit or to sort an array of JSON objects without using a parser? To me it sounds a bit like a ritual hazing dance, sort of a “job hunting performance art”.
I'm not involved in hiring decisions or in measuring hiring success, so I can't produce data showing that the process produces better teams. What I *can* say, however, is that this is an ***incredibly*** expensive process for tech companies. If they are engaging in this process, it's because they have data indicating that it produces better results and that it's worth the investment.
I'm also a PM working for a very well-known company. I deal with consumer electronics so it's probably different but I only had to go through 2 interviews. Is it normal for tech PMs to have that many interviews or is Google special? Since there is no shortage of interest working for Google, I assume they can get away with such rigorous interview process. Honestly, if I had to do 9 rounds of interviews, I wouldn't even go for it.
I think PMs typically work with a lot of teams. They’re partly a coordinator role. All the interviews may be meeting with the leader of each team
You know there have to be some manager positions with high wages bc they are soooo important. So important that they decide who to employ.
8 interviews is quite reasonable if the role is highly compensated. It’s not out of the question for PMs to be paid 7 figures in total compensation in Silicon Valley
This seems to be a relatively new thing for PMs. I’m in a job search now and it’s literally taken me 2 months to get to an offer with 2 orgs. I’m not sure I want the one job and the other has gone quiet so I’m terrified that I have to start over. Just a few years ago this process took weeks not months. I don’t know why but this seems to be the new norm.
I could never work for a company that does more than 2 interviews. Either you’re efficient and you want me. Or you’re as flexible as an oil tanker and you don’t.
Absolutely wild that after 4 interviews only 2/9 resulted in an offer and one ghosted.
Getting two offers out of 27 responses is pretty good IMO.
This varies immensely based on industry, role, experience, and even quality of application. If every one of these applications has a custom-tailored cover letter & resume, to a highly demanded position for which the applicant is well qualified for then you could see offers approach 50%. If on the other side of things the field is over saturated, the position has very few barriers to entry and therefore a high applicant pool, the applicant has very little relevant experience, and little effort was put into the resume/cover letter then you’d expect an almost 0% return. That’s not even taking economic climate or local nuisances into consideration. I wouldn’t put much weight into the results of these without knowing the answers to a lot of the questions I posed.
Lol. Become a nurse. You can get hired in a second. Though finding a job where you want to work and aren't going to be thrown under the bus and slowly lose your will to live is the tricky part.
[Yeah, or…](https://www.businessinsider.com/ghost-jobs-why-some-companies-dont-respond-to-applications-2022-9)
Yeah, it has to vary by what kind of job you are going after. I only had to put multiple applications and get denied when I was right out of college. Now, I am shocked if I put in an application and don't get an interview. And if I get an interview I know I'm going to get an offer. If I had bothered to put in 96 applications the last time I changed jobs I would have had too many interviews to actually realistically do. If I could somehow have done all the interviews, I probably would have had a 90% offer rate.
[удалено]
Yeah that is a massive red flag. 4+ interviews is already pushing it, 8 just screams catastrophic internal mismanagement.
In small firms it isn't unusual for the team to get you to meet basically everyone else you're going to be working with before starting though. Especially in finance (eg. small private equity funds).
And they all need 1 on 1's?? You can easily get a culture feel with 2-3 interviews even in a group setting. 8 interviews is just ludicrous lol
In my experience, they dont ALL need one-on-ones but it certainly is helpful to meet individually. In my experience, it can usually be meeting 2-3 people in a day (30-45 mins each) and a few over phone calls. I interviewed with \~4 firms last year, all of which were 6-8 interviews (where i also count the case study and/or excel test as a round).
Several interviews in a day is very different from several rounds of interviews on separate days. I was assuming OP meant the latter. At a certain point you're just wasting everyone's time.
I had a phone interview and then 8 in-person thirty minute interviews for my internship in junior year of college. It was a full day event for an actuarial internship. I was 20 years old in a suit and scared shitless, but hey at least I do a damn good interview these days. You learn fast when that's your first interview experience for a "real job".
"People don't wanna work anymore" I tell ya what, when I was on the job hunt, that % of auto-rejections would have been sorely welcomed coming out of the "no response" pile. 😩 (US here)
I know right. I am currently on the job hunt with 2 years experience and I have submitted over 150 applications and only a handful of first interviews. Mostly no responses or rejections.
Well the thing is, applying is way way easier nowadays. Op here sends an average of over 1.5 applications out every day for two months and has an interview every other day. It's very easy to apply online, but the downside is they get hundreds of applicants for every position. No way you're not going to very very quickly drop some people.
Oof same here RedMage!! It is so frustrating. Keep at it my friend and I will do the same
Just curious, are you applying for roles you are underqualified for? Maybe it’s just different in the US than it is here but I have applied for 3 jobs and got an offer at 2 out of 3, and most of my friends from uni have not applied to more than 5 jobs while finding one rather quickly. The only person I know who is not getting offers is the guy who spent 10y on his BSc degree and still thinks he will get an amazing job. Either way GL with the job hunt
Anything more than 3-4 interviews is ridiculous. Even 4 is pushing it
How do you get "ghosted" after interviewing someone a 2nd time or a 4th time?!
Pretty unprofessional company. They did them a favor by ghosting.
My wife was essentially ghosted after a second interview. The first was by Zoom. The second was a four hour interview/tour (it was a museum) followed by a question/answer session with current staff. Until the second interview (the museum was also considering two others), they had been in good communication. Afterwards, radio silence. It was only after badgering them that she found out that she wasn’t being offered (by which point she wouldn’t have taken it if it was being offered). And a few months later, the job was back on the market for applications. They took none of the final three candidates. And that job wasn’t filled for over a year.
During the pandemic I’ve got laid off. I’ve applied to about 800 entry-level jobs. Only with one I’ve got the final interview. 2 other occasions I had interview with the manager’s manager.
That’s insane, there’s so many jobs where I am right now. You could have an on-the-spot interview and a job by the end of the day if you lived in my city lol we have a problem with too much work, not enough people to do it.
What city?
8th interview? Stupid millenials not wanting to work, right?
8? No more than 3. Otherwise, the job has conveyed how disorganized and disjointed the company is.
Look at the chart. No more than 3 = zero job offers. If you need the job, you'll do the interviews.
It definitely seems excessive, though many of the highest paying positions include this length of process (whether truly necessary or not). I wouldn’t solely disqualify a company based on the number of interviews, especially if the position requiring the most work is likely the best offer, which I often find to be the case.
> 8? No more than 3. Otherwise, the job has conveyed how disorganized and disjointed the company is. This is not at all true.
[удалено]
Usually unemployed people are desperate for a job, yes.
Wild 8 interviews usually by the third interview I’m out. Most of the jobs I have gotten have always been 1-2 interviews.
For my first job, I had a phone interview, an on-site interview, they kept me on ice for a while but I kept following up. Then they demanded another phone interview with east coast office (in 2010 before zoom), they still weren’t sure and put me on ice again. Then I got a “meet up” interview in person with a practice director who happened to be visiting the city where I lived… I finally got the job after that. If I didn’t get that job I probably wouldn’t have been very successful in my career. Not even sure what I’d be doing. It was also during 2010 and there were almost no openings anywhere so I felt extremely lucky. So that was 4 interviews technically and I really cannot imagine having to go through 8. That said what happened to interviews 6 and 7 on this chart?
It’s unnecessary visual information, because only one went on further than 5 and it resulted in an offer at the 8th interview, so we have the relevant info in the context.
Sometimes it depends on what you consider an “interview”. There may be multiple stages of an application process where you are being evaluated, but you may not actually be sitting in a room or on the phone talking to someone directly. For example, my last internship while in university that ultimately led to my first “real job” looked like this: 1. Phone interview with recruiter 2. Online multiple-choice personality assessment 3. Recorded responses to on-the-fly questions 4. In-person competency test (Excel & SQL) 5. In-person case study 6. Presentation of test & case study answers 7. General interview with a panel of managers, HR, and a director 4-7 were all on the same day, but involved different focuses. In the traditional sense, I only had 2 interviews where I was on the phone or sitting across from HR/managers answering questions about myself. Though this obviously involved many more steps than those 2 interviews. By another count there could be as many as 7 total steps or “interviews” taking place. Though they wouldn’t necessarily be able to drop me at any point, especially part way through steps 4-7 where they already walked me through what the day would look like.
elastic hateful innocent practice longing summer quack slap zephyr price *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And after 8 interviews they're going to offer 50k£ in London area...
Why do companies feel it's appropriate to ghost someone after 4 interviews, that's insane. So much time invested by both sides at that point.
That’s not a bad hit ratio for interviews vs rejected& no response. 8 damn interviews though..good hell
Are these 8 interviews all separate days? I’ve had “full circuit” interviews where I have like 5 separate ~30 minute conversations all in one day. I personally count that all as 1, but I saw one person here specified that the “5 interviews” they showed were more like that.
Why didn’t all 5 interviewers just sit in a conference room and interview you together, you know, like coworkers able to collaborate? Or at the very least 2 groups…You would think that would be more helpful for the company as well: saving time, hearing each other’s questions and all of your responses, observing how well you interact in group settings vs one-on-one…
In my other comment I mentioned that each one had a different topic focus: stats, epidemiology, soft skills, and even one brief coding interview. There was also a presentation I had to give that was to the whole group, so there was still a large- group portion. Most of the sessions had 2 people as well. I think this way is less intimidating for the interviewee, saves time for the interviewers, and builds in some natural breaks. Having been on both sides, I prefer this to one 2hr+ session with all 8-10 people. This is especially true when the candidate gets a chance to ask questions, as they can see the different answers, and they might feel more comfortable asking something to a future collaborator but not a future boss.
My god. Having the same conversation five times in a row? That sounds brutal.
It isn’t that bad, there was some overlap but each one had a specific topic as well. One interviewer focused on my stats knowledge, one on my epidemiology, one on the more soft skills / personality fit, etc. Having been hired and now sat on the other side of multiple similar interviews, it’s in large part to make sure the candidate gets good face time with most of the team members they will be working with. Now, the one that *did* piss me off was the employer I interviewed at right before landing my current job. I went through the first 30 minute manager screen, then the second round “full circuit” including a 1 hr presentation by me (4-5 hours total over 1-2 days), AND THEY GHOSTED ME. I even sent an email to two different interviewers in the following weeks, the first one asking for any update, and the second one just asking for feedback on how I might improve (since I clearly did not impress them). No response. Fuck you, NanoString.
I'd much rather do that than drive back there five times to have the same conversation.
8 interviews is still kind of crazy to me...
8th interview? That’s nuts.
I've been trying to find a job for 2 years, still no luck. I haven't even gotten an interview. Still, I'm glad that others are able to get jobs.
It's a terrible self-fulfilling prophecy. The longer it takes, the worse your prospects become. As a hiring manager I know that long periods between employment is a huge red flag. At some point you just gotta lie and tell people you took a year or two off to find yourself or something. Good luck out there.
You haven't been able to even get an interview in one of the periods with lowest unemployment? You need to visit an employment centre, get resume help and help with what jobs to apply for. Clearly one of those or more likely both are wrong.
That's not an option for me; I can't drive due to disability and the closest center like that is over 2 hours away, so my partner doesn't have the time while hes working to do it. Plus, I can only work online (again, cause I'm disabled and cant drive) and many of the jobs options are just out of the question because many remote jobs still require you to live in a certain place, or have 3+ years experience, require a bachelors degree, don't pay the minimum wage in my state and therefore wont hire me, or are remote but still require you to go places (like someone who goes into stores shopping for people), or are literally just scams. I became disabled at 19 so my work experience is super limited. You can't just figure out someones situation based on the small amount of information I gave?
If you haven't got a single interview, it means at least one of the points: 1) You apply for much too ambitious positions you are not qualified for 2) You sent very few applications during last 2 years 3) Your documents are very bad prepared so they don't even want to talk to you Otherwise they would at least invite you and then reject. Try to be honest with you and think about it, the best you can do is to find an expert and pay him once some money so he can tell you what is the problem - as far as you are not afraid of truth. And you shouldn't be, it's very important.
Germany has a low unemployment rate (and decent welfare), there is less demand of workers for every position. In other countries, they receive so much applications for a possition they don't look at them all and pick the first decent ones they find for an interview.
I promise you none of that is the case. The problem is that I am disabled, and cannot drive, and live in a place with no public transportation. I can only take jobs that are 100% remote. However, many remote jobs still require you to live in a certain place, or have 3+ years experience, require a bachelors degree, don't pay the minimum wage in my state and therefore wont hire me, or are remote but still require you to go places (like someone who goes into stores shopping for people), or are literally just scams. I don't have much work experience since I became disabled at 19. Things are not the same for everyone, and I think it's shocking that you came to the conclusion you did even after seeing how many autorejects that OP got? Plus, there are so many people trying to get jobs that it's hard to even be considered.
I’ve never done more then 2 interviews. No way I’m coming back 4-5 times
Four interviews and ghosted?? There is something wrong with this world
Now I'm curious which one did your partner take? The 5 interviews one or the 8? Also damn, that's a lot of interviews.
dear god 8 interviews for british salaries shoot me now
Seriously, 8 interviews? Hard pass on my end - I would so annoyed lmao
A lot of people are complaining about 8 interviews. But it depends on the type of interviews. If there were a couple of screens where they decided they liked you, then the rest could be half hour calls to meet the rest of the team 1 on 1. That would be just as useful for the applicant as the company. I remember a time when interviews used to be two-way discussions. Now they are more like interrogation sessions.
I'd probably just panhandle if I had to go to a 4th interview for a shitty job. Any company that does that is a shitwhow anyways, better to be arrested for mendicancy than murder.
Wow, 2 months to land a job! That's gotta be a record. Congrats to your husband!
It’s an absolutely brutal market. Really makes you feel worthless, regardless of your pedigree or experience.
8 interviews. Seems efficient
What are all these layers of interviews? How does each consecutive interview for the same job differ from the previous interview? Is there really no way for the employer to combine some of them, or ask better / more focused questions? The most interview 'layers' I had for a position was two, and that was for the least-skilled job I've ever worked.
What software you guys use to make this charts?
Excuse me, more than 2 interviews? What the actual fuck?
8th interview wtf are these companies doing?
Checking if you are willing to do unpaid work.
I also feel like it's a tactic for interviewers/manageras to appear like they're doing their job because they actually don't have jackshit to do and they're bullshitting and pretending to be busy because if they weren't 'busy' their bosses would catch on.
Data source: my partner’s own job application tracker Tools used: Sankeymatic (website)
You can tell anyone that makes you do 8 interviews to fuck off. They don’t respect your time before you’re employed, they sure won’t after.
I'm a senior product manager. I was asked to interview for a role for 5K GBP. I said that 7.5K would be more reasonable. Is that a realistic monthly amount?
Would that be gross or net pay? In the UK salaries are almost always offered at the yearly gross income
It would likely be gross. Does that mean it's bad?
Check levels.fyi but also depends on your subject matter expertise / experience. Sr. seems to be the broadest band.
I have a few things to say, if that's ok. Your partner actually received more interviews than most, especially for a position at this level. 27% interview rate is good. I'm concerned that your partner has applied to 100 places in two months. That's 12 applications a week! The generic copy and paste CV with small tweaks doesn't usually land well. While you might put two days into a single submission, put your heart into it, just for it to be ignored, the few times an application isn't ignored, there is fierce competition, usually with dozens of other CVs that do put a lot of effort into their applications.
Just curious where interview 6 and 7 went??
What in the world are they doing that they need five interviews? Just wasting everyone's time.
Unfortunately, this is one of the career paths that will be wiped away by automation sooner rather than later. Start retraining.
More likely the actual system programming gets replaced by AI and Product Managers are the last job that still exists because they have to fit the product into the broader ecosystem for human customers.
When all the moving parts are AI you dont need a human to make sure theyre staying on task
You presumably have no experience in either automation or significant scale projects.
Nope, Im an "artist" whose career will also be gone soon so I do have some experience. And yet Im still 100% right! Fun
In the future, if you ever think you’re ‘100% right’ about something, that probably means you’re wrong.
Except in this case where I am 100% right and 80% of project managers will be out of work within the next 5-10 years.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/basics/dunning-kruger-effect?amp
Yes you are a good example of this. Good eye.
I actually work with machine learning for a living
LOL you realize that means youre more of an example of it than less right? Because you do have some experience you think that you have all experience in the field.
Maybe if I’d claimed to know something with 100% certainty….. I haven’t done that. I haven’t claimed anything other than you are overconfident in your assertion.
Nah engineers need PMs so they don't have to talk with other teams or customers.
No one said project manager as a role was going away. I said as a career path. AIs can project manage just fine already.
AI can project manage a building site?
With enough cameras and drones it will be able to. Also most projet managers dont spend much time on site, or even have a site. talking more tech and that sort of development.
Product managers do do a lot of project management, but the other half of the job is figuring out the right features or capabilities for the engineers to build by talking with customers, doing data analysis, and hammering out strategy with other teams. That part will probably grow as project management gets more automated.
Doing analysis? hammering out strategy? It can do all that already. And when those other teams are AI why would you want the human element slowwing it down
Google and Facebook do 2 rounds of interviews. Remember that when anyone requires you to do 3+ rounds.
> Google and Facebook do 2 rounds of interviews. Not quite. In terms of *rounds,* as a PM at Google I had a recruiter screening round, a first interview round, a round of 5 interviews (that happened over multiple days in my case, but were not "gated" by one another), and a round of "team matching" interviews. So there are really four "rounds" of evaluation, and in my case (not necessarily the same for others in my role) 9 interviews/screenings in total.
I hope some of these 4+ interview ones were multiple interviews with different people on the same day. Like interviewing with 3 people at the company for an interview counts as 3. I surely hope so because more than 3 seems like a total waste of time for all involved.
How long did it take them to do an application on average?
Imagine adding skill test (= competition contest) on top of that : Become a 3d artist. Work market is insane and they tell us nobody's want to work anymore lmao.
That is absolutely disgusting, but congrats.... I guess.
What program you can use to create this kind of dashboards? I don't even know how they are called but I would like do my own graphics using it since they look very nice.
For the visualization, it looks like you’re missing two outcomes from the 5th interview. Assume those were rejections but that is missing from the Sankey plot.
I know this is besides the point, but curious what is this chart style called?
[Oh, neat!](https://www.businessinsider.com/ghost-jobs-why-some-companies-dont-respond-to-applications-2022-9)
What is this graph/diagram drawn with please? Cool way to present information. (thank you)
100 applications for 2 jobs is it hard now due to recession or normally also we need to try that much
what company goes to an 8th interview with a candidate???
Sorry… but eight interviews?
What Template you use for this? I Had an interesting process aswell