Slashdot Mirror
Average Duration of Hiring Process For Software Engineers: 35 Days
itwbennett writes: Despite the high demand for tech workers of pretty much all stripes, the hiring process is still rather drawn out, with the average time-to-hire for Software Engineers taking 35 days. That's one of the findings of a new study from career site Glassdoor. The study, led by Glassdoor's Chief Economist Dr. Andrew Chamberlain, analyzed over 340,000 interview reviews, covering 74,000 unique job titles, submitted to the site from February 2009 through February 2015. Glassdoor found that the average time-to-hire for all jobs has increased 80% (from 12.6 days to 22.9 days) since 2010. The biggest reason for this jump: The increased reliance on screening tests of various sorts, from background checks and skills tests to drug tests and personality tests, among others.
So the duration is 12 days longer than the average, so what?
The problem is that while you are evaluating the job candidate, the candidate is evaluating your company, looking at other opportunities, and going to other interviews. It is the best candidates that are most likely to get other offers. You might think you are being more selective by dragging out the process, but the actual result is that you are losing the wheat and keeping the chaff.
There is little evidence that dragging out the process helps. Checking references doesn't really help, since you have no idea if you are talking to their ex-boss or their roommate. Even criminal records have been shown to have no correlation with job performance.
When I schedule an interview with a prospective hire, I prepare the paperwork to make a job offer at the end of the interview. If they look solid, and everyone involved gives a thumbs up, I make the offer. More often then not, they accept on the spot. Others sleep on it, and call and accept the following day. But we lose a lot fewer good candidates that way.
I'm in this process right now. It has taken between 3 and 4 months to get to the end of the interview process with each of the big companies in Silicon Valley, depending on the company. Google alone has had me onsite for 8 separate interview days, not counting 3-4 phone screens. I'm highly qualified (PhD in CS from MIT, postdoc at Harvard Medical School, and as a Xoogler, I technically don't even have to interview to return to Google), but that hasn't expedited things. The hiring climate right now is ridiculously stringent. It wasn't this way even 3 years ago, I could walk into almost any job, and go from sending in a resume to getting an offer in a week or less.
Works both ways man.
Have you considered why applicants have a history or job hopping? Hint: the common factor is the employer not the employee. So, as an employer, be different - stop being 'that guy'. You might be ahead of your competitors by being a more attractive employer.
Is it possible that holding job hopping against a candidate is really a sign that you, as a recruiter, are ignoring the job market? You know, the real job market where there is little to no vertical movement? The one where a person can only be 'promoted' by lateral movement in switching companies... perhaps to a competitor?
You are dealing with an environment you spent decades to create. Now you bitch that it didn't produce voluntary slaves?
Might not have been you personally but fuck yourself. You spent time following along rather than trying to change things for the better.
Life isn't fair is true. So, there are two choices: follow along fucking other people trying to avoid getting fucked yourself (ie - just bend over) -or- try to change things so life is more fair than before. (ie - fix that fucking problem!)
What side are you on?