Hiring Practice Observation

As many of you know, PDog has been looking for a full time gig. And he's been very very picky and has only found 3 positions he actually wants.

What he has noticed is an interesting difference in the way large companies and small companies seem to treat interviewing. I've noticed every company has an interview that revolves around trying to scare the interviewee away. The purpose, I think, is to make sure the prospective hire is committed to the job if it is offered.

The small business invariably base this interview around how hard/challenging/mundane the work really is. Basically, the message is this isn't glamorous, it's hard both in terms of being difficult to do and also in terms of how routine it can be. This seems to me like a smart approach.

The large business invariably base the interview on being difficult to work with. This is often framed as a technical interview, but the point seems mostly to try to fluster the interviewee and see how he reacts.

While I can see the value in trying to find out how someone reacts under stress I wonder if this might have something to do with the 10% success rate large companies report in hiring.

It seems to me that interview style 1, while not perfect, will weed out people who really don't want to do the work. Interview style 2, on the otherhand, seems like it would weed out people who don't like being treated like jerks (or aren't desperate enough to put up with it.. give PDog a month he may be there!).

Just sayin'