Exatex t1_je4csax wrote

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.


Exatex t1_je3xzj5 wrote

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.



Exatex t1_je1q8lc wrote

> 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.


Exatex t1_je1d4sj wrote

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.


Exatex t1_jdx04kx wrote

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.


Exatex t1_ixbxwxj wrote

Very packed - so packed that although the rings are just 10-100m thick, they block most light going though them

run fact edit: Saturns rings are some of the thinnest things known to us. They have a diameter of ~1 million kilometers.