[screwturner68]

Why? It shouldn't take two months and multiple interviews to hire a quality employee. I've been hired multiple times by large companies tech and otherwise during my first interview. They liked my resume, they liked my experience and I proved that I didn't have a third head and would wear a suit if totally necessary and that was good enough because they needed the worker. The whole process today seems gratuitous, at least in the United States everywhere is still at will employment, if it doesn't work fire them and hire someone else. Frankly I think the process is so long because a company doesn't want to hire new people/a replacement, they'd rather string the workers along with the "we just can't find the prefect fit" and pocket the savings than hire a needed worker that might not be a prefect fit -nobody is a prefect fit. Or maybe the answer is simpler, they really don't need another worker.

[johnnyanmac]

I very enthusiastically want an answer to this as well. If I get an offer on my current farthest company today and start Monday, it'd be the shortest turnaround I'd ever expeienced. I applied on August 31st and got a reply on September 10th (and a call within a few more days). So the process was 6-8 weeks depending on how you measure it.

well, 2nd fastest. My fastest would be my first role if you count "reply back starts the process", since the process was 3 weeks. The problem was they took 6 weeks to reply back (and yes, applying in December is rough. one reason not to graduate in fall semester I guess), so it cancels out. Take that one as you may.

> Frankly I think the process is so long because a company doesn't want to hire new people/a replacement

to give some generosity: a bad fit SWE can certainly do a lot of damage to a codebase and overall team morale, even if kicked out in 3 months. That plus the higher pay compared to other industries makes me understand some scrutiny. those 3 months are still ~30-50k+ just to "test" someone on the field.

But I do agree at some point in your career that it shouldn't take 5 interviews to see if someone is BS'ing their resume (that's what background checks and references are for) nor has "1 years of experience 10 times". I can only see more than 3 interviews (or 2 + recruiter call) being necessary if they are considering you for multiple roles (which you hopefully agreed to, either in applications or in the recruiter call). recruiter call -> technical/leadership evaluation -> soft question/culture fit (this can be 2nd if you want).