Comment by bluGill
21 hours ago
That is what people miss about interviews. Often when you interview you don't have reasonable leads on any other job and so you don't feel like there is a choice since you likely need a job (unemployment rarely pays as well as a job). However interviews are not only about the company deciding if they will hire you, they are also about do you want to work there and convincing you to take the job if one is offered.
So make sure you use those "do you have any questions" time to ask questions! What is it really like to work there. How much notice do you need to give before taking vacation? Do they really give pay raises? How often do they lay people off? What is the dress code? Do they let you take time for your kids school activities? And so on - these questions should be things that are important to you - find out.
In the best cases the interview is only about convincing you to take the offer - generally because someone who you worked with at a previous job said "hire this person" and they trust that person enough to not need any other interview. So keep your network open.
People don't miss that about interviews, they just know that the balance of power is so skewed that the interests of the employer become the only relevant part. The employer can keep going through hundreds of applicants until they find someone who's literally perfect in every single way, they have nearly unlimited time. Meanwhile, the applicants need a job now, any job at all, they're on a hard time limit until their money runs out.
I feel like in practice, unless you're an established, senior professional in a high-paying, in-demand field with a network to rely on, this would go something like:
> What is it really like to work there. How much notice do you need to give before taking vacation? Do they really give pay raises? How often do they lay people off? What is the dress code? Do they let you take time for your kids school activities?
"Candidate ABC seems too demanding and picky, constantly inquiring about irrelevant specifics. They would be a bad fit for our company culture. I advise going with candidate XYZ instead."
> they just know that the balance of power is so skewed that the interests of the employer become the only relevant part
That happens since people only apply to very well paying jobs. If you apply to shit enough jobs they wont be asking hard questions, and those who offer shit jobs will say "all the power lies with the employees, I have no power to make them stay or apply, I am social and nice to them and they still reject my job offer!".
Just give the companies what they want and they all will want you, it is that easy. If you try to give them something they don't care about, like a hiring manager giving you a smile and minimum wage, of course you will get rejected a lot. Give them what they ask for, not what you think they should want.
I’ve had some of my hardest interview questions come from the people who underpay significantly.
Maybe in some companies. Every interviewer I've talked to has never considered those a negative. Most don't even think of them at all once the interview is over. Of course I've always worked in companies where people work their 8 hours and go home to their family and so you would be a good fit (depending on what you asked).
I know applicants need the job more than they need you. However you still have options if you don't get this one - you should always be following several leads until you finally get a job. Odds are your other leads are not anywhere close to as advanced as this, but if you can wait a couple more months you have a chance.
Unless you are really desperate to find a job, there are definitely workplaces you would want to avoid. While a power imbalance does in principle exist, that doesn’t mean you usually have no choice at all. Of course that is less of a case when you just start, but in general pp can go around doing interviews and negotiating positions rather than just accept the first offer.
I have to push back on the unlimited amount of time thing. Maybe in FAANG that’s true but in the places I’ve worked for, hiring is something that comes down from on high - someone tells us they need N bodies for some project, and we need to have a team hired by some deadline. We really can’t interview endlessly.
I don't mean that you're literally allowed to run interviews for years. I mean that companies can, if they choose to, interview people indefinitely until they find a suitable candidate. The company won't collapse if they don't find an employee by the deadline, it's not imperative to their existence, it's just a nice to have, a goal. Maybe some project or initiative doesn't pan out or gets pushed back if no one gets hired, but the impact of all that seems rather limited. On the other hand, my existence is fully contingent on finding a job, and if I overrun the deadline I have to find a place to work, I won't be able to eat and pay rent. My time limit is existential, their time limit is artificial and fully in the realm of planning.
It's also very expensive to interview, since you're typically paying people who make over $100 an hour to interview people and review their code.
> So make sure you use those "do you have any questions" time to ask questions!
I started giving interviews again and im surprised how many people dont ask anything. I'm an IC, not a hiring manager, and only evaluating a specific thing, (technical assement) and still nothing really.
It just goes to show how skewed the power balance is right now. People are probably afraid to make an extra move that can deduct points for any obscure reason.
When I interview people I encourage them to ask any question they want and I make damned sure it doesn't reflect in my report to the higher-ups! Just imagine being in their shoes, you could be in the same position tomorrow!