Is a three hour in house interview that mostly covers work history standard?
Yesterday, I had an in-house interview with two engineers and then later the owner of the company. It lasted three hours. Not sure what to make of a three hour interview about just work history and aspirations. Is that standard?
interviewing
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
add a comment |
Yesterday, I had an in-house interview with two engineers and then later the owner of the company. It lasted three hours. Not sure what to make of a three hour interview about just work history and aspirations. Is that standard?
interviewing
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
What does "in-house" mean in this context? As in "on the premises of the new company"? Or "applying to a different job with the same company"?
– Erik
Dec 18 '18 at 15:55
1
@Erik, on the premises of the new company.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 15:57
I don't know what "In house" means but I had a total 8 hour interview before. 4 hours with 3 managers (IT) and another 4 hour with 3 different managers (Financials). There isn't a standard. Every job/company is different
– Isaiah3015
Dec 18 '18 at 18:25
add a comment |
Yesterday, I had an in-house interview with two engineers and then later the owner of the company. It lasted three hours. Not sure what to make of a three hour interview about just work history and aspirations. Is that standard?
interviewing
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
Yesterday, I had an in-house interview with two engineers and then later the owner of the company. It lasted three hours. Not sure what to make of a three hour interview about just work history and aspirations. Is that standard?
interviewing
interviewing
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
edited Dec 18 '18 at 16:07
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
asked Dec 18 '18 at 15:52
Daniel
344110
344110
What does "in-house" mean in this context? As in "on the premises of the new company"? Or "applying to a different job with the same company"?
– Erik
Dec 18 '18 at 15:55
1
@Erik, on the premises of the new company.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 15:57
I don't know what "In house" means but I had a total 8 hour interview before. 4 hours with 3 managers (IT) and another 4 hour with 3 different managers (Financials). There isn't a standard. Every job/company is different
– Isaiah3015
Dec 18 '18 at 18:25
add a comment |
What does "in-house" mean in this context? As in "on the premises of the new company"? Or "applying to a different job with the same company"?
– Erik
Dec 18 '18 at 15:55
1
@Erik, on the premises of the new company.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 15:57
I don't know what "In house" means but I had a total 8 hour interview before. 4 hours with 3 managers (IT) and another 4 hour with 3 different managers (Financials). There isn't a standard. Every job/company is different
– Isaiah3015
Dec 18 '18 at 18:25
What does "in-house" mean in this context? As in "on the premises of the new company"? Or "applying to a different job with the same company"?
– Erik
Dec 18 '18 at 15:55
What does "in-house" mean in this context? As in "on the premises of the new company"? Or "applying to a different job with the same company"?
– Erik
Dec 18 '18 at 15:55
1
1
@Erik, on the premises of the new company.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 15:57
@Erik, on the premises of the new company.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 15:57
I don't know what "In house" means but I had a total 8 hour interview before. 4 hours with 3 managers (IT) and another 4 hour with 3 different managers (Financials). There isn't a standard. Every job/company is different
– Isaiah3015
Dec 18 '18 at 18:25
I don't know what "In house" means but I had a total 8 hour interview before. 4 hours with 3 managers (IT) and another 4 hour with 3 different managers (Financials). There isn't a standard. Every job/company is different
– Isaiah3015
Dec 18 '18 at 18:25
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
There is no standard. Different companies have different hiring practices. Some focus on personal interviews, some on your on-paper qualifications, some focus on standardized tests. Also, companies tend to invest more time into hiring decisions when it's about a more important position. You wouldn't spend as much time on picking a janitor as you would on picking a branch manager. So depending on the job and the company, job interviews can take anywhere between a few minutes to several hours.
But when an interview takes longer, that's usually a good sign. It means everyone is interested in you. When they would have found some reason to not hire you early, they would have cut the interview short and gotten back to their actual work, not needlessly waste your and their time by extending the interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
That makes sense, I guess the team are excellent at playing poker because I could not assess what such a long interview meant. I used to be good at telling whether I got the job or not or whether they were interested or not.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:11
@dwizum I bowed to peer pressure and changed the answer.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 17:14
@Philipp upvote added.
– stannius
Dec 18 '18 at 17:58
I challenge the notion that janitors are less important than branch managers... ever work in a building with no custodians? Yeah. Certainly janitors' job skills are in greater supply, But less important? You can run a business for a week with no manager on site. Try it without a janitor. Enjoy the plummeting morale from the overflowing trash and filthy bathrooms.
– Adonalsium
Dec 18 '18 at 18:34
1
@Adonalsium I did not claim that you don't need a janitor, just that the decision which janitor to hire is not nearly as important as the decision which manager to hire.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 18:37
|
show 3 more comments
At my current job, the interview was rather long.
I spent 30 minutes with the recruiter, then 30 minutes with the manager I would report to, then just over an hour with the team i would be joining, then a little more than an hour with the IT directory (above the manager). Then 10-15 minutes with team and manager. Then we all went out to lunch. We only spoke of personal interests during lunch. Then back to the office where i spent another 30 minutes or so with the manager.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
1
This is a pretty typical of how many tech jobs hire in the US. Great answer.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Dec 18 '18 at 16:50
add a comment |
Your (pre-edit) question was,
Is that standard?
It's hard to answer what is standard for interviews because policies will vary from position to position and industry to industry. That said, a 3-hour interview is certainly not unusual for many positions, and the structure you experienced (team technical interview, followed by a one on one interview with a leader) is pretty standard for a longer interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
You edited out the rest of your question as I was typing my answer so I'll leave the rest of my answer out - although you seemed stuck on their interest in your history so maybe that's worth a separate question.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
Yes, I edited it out, because I started to see one close vote, so I thought that it needed to be edited.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
I thought it raised a good point, you seem concerned about how to address your consulting/freelancing history in an interview setting, or at least concerned about how your history is being perceived. You might get some good feedback about how to address those concerns if you create a new question focused on that.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:20
I agree with you. It is an issue I would like addressed. I will create a new question regarding my consulting/freelancing history.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:23
add a comment |
I don't think there is a standard. Shortest interview I had didn't even last 10 minutes (I did get the job), longest I had was 7 hours: twelve 30-minute interviews with peers, followed by a one hour interview by the manager. And I've had everything in between as well.
At my current job, if you get to the stage of face to face interviews (we start off with phone interviews and coding tests), the candidate starts off with 30 minutes with a recruiter (mostly about the process of hiring/relocation), then has 2 one hour interviews with 2 peers (so 4 peers in total), followed by a 30 minute interview from someone from management. And then they see the recruiter again.
From my (limited) experience, both as a candidate, an interviewer, and from talking about others about hiring processes, I'd say that 3 hours is far from unusual.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "423"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: false,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124921%2fis-a-three-hour-in-house-interview-that-mostly-covers-work-history-standard%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(function () {
$("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function () {
var showEditor = function() {
$("#show-editor-button").hide();
$("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
};
var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
if(useFancy == 'True') {
var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');
$(this).loadPopup({
url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
loaded: function(popup) {
var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');
pTitle.text(popupTitle);
pBody.html(popupBody);
pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
}
})
} else{
var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true) {
showEditor();
}
}
});
});
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
There is no standard. Different companies have different hiring practices. Some focus on personal interviews, some on your on-paper qualifications, some focus on standardized tests. Also, companies tend to invest more time into hiring decisions when it's about a more important position. You wouldn't spend as much time on picking a janitor as you would on picking a branch manager. So depending on the job and the company, job interviews can take anywhere between a few minutes to several hours.
But when an interview takes longer, that's usually a good sign. It means everyone is interested in you. When they would have found some reason to not hire you early, they would have cut the interview short and gotten back to their actual work, not needlessly waste your and their time by extending the interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
That makes sense, I guess the team are excellent at playing poker because I could not assess what such a long interview meant. I used to be good at telling whether I got the job or not or whether they were interested or not.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:11
@dwizum I bowed to peer pressure and changed the answer.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 17:14
@Philipp upvote added.
– stannius
Dec 18 '18 at 17:58
I challenge the notion that janitors are less important than branch managers... ever work in a building with no custodians? Yeah. Certainly janitors' job skills are in greater supply, But less important? You can run a business for a week with no manager on site. Try it without a janitor. Enjoy the plummeting morale from the overflowing trash and filthy bathrooms.
– Adonalsium
Dec 18 '18 at 18:34
1
@Adonalsium I did not claim that you don't need a janitor, just that the decision which janitor to hire is not nearly as important as the decision which manager to hire.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 18:37
|
show 3 more comments
There is no standard. Different companies have different hiring practices. Some focus on personal interviews, some on your on-paper qualifications, some focus on standardized tests. Also, companies tend to invest more time into hiring decisions when it's about a more important position. You wouldn't spend as much time on picking a janitor as you would on picking a branch manager. So depending on the job and the company, job interviews can take anywhere between a few minutes to several hours.
But when an interview takes longer, that's usually a good sign. It means everyone is interested in you. When they would have found some reason to not hire you early, they would have cut the interview short and gotten back to their actual work, not needlessly waste your and their time by extending the interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
That makes sense, I guess the team are excellent at playing poker because I could not assess what such a long interview meant. I used to be good at telling whether I got the job or not or whether they were interested or not.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:11
@dwizum I bowed to peer pressure and changed the answer.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 17:14
@Philipp upvote added.
– stannius
Dec 18 '18 at 17:58
I challenge the notion that janitors are less important than branch managers... ever work in a building with no custodians? Yeah. Certainly janitors' job skills are in greater supply, But less important? You can run a business for a week with no manager on site. Try it without a janitor. Enjoy the plummeting morale from the overflowing trash and filthy bathrooms.
– Adonalsium
Dec 18 '18 at 18:34
1
@Adonalsium I did not claim that you don't need a janitor, just that the decision which janitor to hire is not nearly as important as the decision which manager to hire.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 18:37
|
show 3 more comments
There is no standard. Different companies have different hiring practices. Some focus on personal interviews, some on your on-paper qualifications, some focus on standardized tests. Also, companies tend to invest more time into hiring decisions when it's about a more important position. You wouldn't spend as much time on picking a janitor as you would on picking a branch manager. So depending on the job and the company, job interviews can take anywhere between a few minutes to several hours.
But when an interview takes longer, that's usually a good sign. It means everyone is interested in you. When they would have found some reason to not hire you early, they would have cut the interview short and gotten back to their actual work, not needlessly waste your and their time by extending the interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
There is no standard. Different companies have different hiring practices. Some focus on personal interviews, some on your on-paper qualifications, some focus on standardized tests. Also, companies tend to invest more time into hiring decisions when it's about a more important position. You wouldn't spend as much time on picking a janitor as you would on picking a branch manager. So depending on the job and the company, job interviews can take anywhere between a few minutes to several hours.
But when an interview takes longer, that's usually a good sign. It means everyone is interested in you. When they would have found some reason to not hire you early, they would have cut the interview short and gotten back to their actual work, not needlessly waste your and their time by extending the interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
edited Dec 18 '18 at 17:49
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Philipp
22.5k45389
22.5k45389
That makes sense, I guess the team are excellent at playing poker because I could not assess what such a long interview meant. I used to be good at telling whether I got the job or not or whether they were interested or not.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:11
@dwizum I bowed to peer pressure and changed the answer.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 17:14
@Philipp upvote added.
– stannius
Dec 18 '18 at 17:58
I challenge the notion that janitors are less important than branch managers... ever work in a building with no custodians? Yeah. Certainly janitors' job skills are in greater supply, But less important? You can run a business for a week with no manager on site. Try it without a janitor. Enjoy the plummeting morale from the overflowing trash and filthy bathrooms.
– Adonalsium
Dec 18 '18 at 18:34
1
@Adonalsium I did not claim that you don't need a janitor, just that the decision which janitor to hire is not nearly as important as the decision which manager to hire.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 18:37
|
show 3 more comments
That makes sense, I guess the team are excellent at playing poker because I could not assess what such a long interview meant. I used to be good at telling whether I got the job or not or whether they were interested or not.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:11
@dwizum I bowed to peer pressure and changed the answer.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 17:14
@Philipp upvote added.
– stannius
Dec 18 '18 at 17:58
I challenge the notion that janitors are less important than branch managers... ever work in a building with no custodians? Yeah. Certainly janitors' job skills are in greater supply, But less important? You can run a business for a week with no manager on site. Try it without a janitor. Enjoy the plummeting morale from the overflowing trash and filthy bathrooms.
– Adonalsium
Dec 18 '18 at 18:34
1
@Adonalsium I did not claim that you don't need a janitor, just that the decision which janitor to hire is not nearly as important as the decision which manager to hire.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 18:37
That makes sense, I guess the team are excellent at playing poker because I could not assess what such a long interview meant. I used to be good at telling whether I got the job or not or whether they were interested or not.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:11
That makes sense, I guess the team are excellent at playing poker because I could not assess what such a long interview meant. I used to be good at telling whether I got the job or not or whether they were interested or not.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:11
@dwizum I bowed to peer pressure and changed the answer.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 17:14
@dwizum I bowed to peer pressure and changed the answer.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 17:14
@Philipp upvote added.
– stannius
Dec 18 '18 at 17:58
@Philipp upvote added.
– stannius
Dec 18 '18 at 17:58
I challenge the notion that janitors are less important than branch managers... ever work in a building with no custodians? Yeah. Certainly janitors' job skills are in greater supply, But less important? You can run a business for a week with no manager on site. Try it without a janitor. Enjoy the plummeting morale from the overflowing trash and filthy bathrooms.
– Adonalsium
Dec 18 '18 at 18:34
I challenge the notion that janitors are less important than branch managers... ever work in a building with no custodians? Yeah. Certainly janitors' job skills are in greater supply, But less important? You can run a business for a week with no manager on site. Try it without a janitor. Enjoy the plummeting morale from the overflowing trash and filthy bathrooms.
– Adonalsium
Dec 18 '18 at 18:34
1
1
@Adonalsium I did not claim that you don't need a janitor, just that the decision which janitor to hire is not nearly as important as the decision which manager to hire.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 18:37
@Adonalsium I did not claim that you don't need a janitor, just that the decision which janitor to hire is not nearly as important as the decision which manager to hire.
– Philipp
Dec 18 '18 at 18:37
|
show 3 more comments
At my current job, the interview was rather long.
I spent 30 minutes with the recruiter, then 30 minutes with the manager I would report to, then just over an hour with the team i would be joining, then a little more than an hour with the IT directory (above the manager). Then 10-15 minutes with team and manager. Then we all went out to lunch. We only spoke of personal interests during lunch. Then back to the office where i spent another 30 minutes or so with the manager.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
1
This is a pretty typical of how many tech jobs hire in the US. Great answer.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Dec 18 '18 at 16:50
add a comment |
At my current job, the interview was rather long.
I spent 30 minutes with the recruiter, then 30 minutes with the manager I would report to, then just over an hour with the team i would be joining, then a little more than an hour with the IT directory (above the manager). Then 10-15 minutes with team and manager. Then we all went out to lunch. We only spoke of personal interests during lunch. Then back to the office where i spent another 30 minutes or so with the manager.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
1
This is a pretty typical of how many tech jobs hire in the US. Great answer.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Dec 18 '18 at 16:50
add a comment |
At my current job, the interview was rather long.
I spent 30 minutes with the recruiter, then 30 minutes with the manager I would report to, then just over an hour with the team i would be joining, then a little more than an hour with the IT directory (above the manager). Then 10-15 minutes with team and manager. Then we all went out to lunch. We only spoke of personal interests during lunch. Then back to the office where i spent another 30 minutes or so with the manager.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
At my current job, the interview was rather long.
I spent 30 minutes with the recruiter, then 30 minutes with the manager I would report to, then just over an hour with the team i would be joining, then a little more than an hour with the IT directory (above the manager). Then 10-15 minutes with team and manager. Then we all went out to lunch. We only spoke of personal interests during lunch. Then back to the office where i spent another 30 minutes or so with the manager.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:46
jesse
78435
78435
1
This is a pretty typical of how many tech jobs hire in the US. Great answer.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Dec 18 '18 at 16:50
add a comment |
1
This is a pretty typical of how many tech jobs hire in the US. Great answer.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Dec 18 '18 at 16:50
1
1
This is a pretty typical of how many tech jobs hire in the US. Great answer.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Dec 18 '18 at 16:50
This is a pretty typical of how many tech jobs hire in the US. Great answer.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Dec 18 '18 at 16:50
add a comment |
Your (pre-edit) question was,
Is that standard?
It's hard to answer what is standard for interviews because policies will vary from position to position and industry to industry. That said, a 3-hour interview is certainly not unusual for many positions, and the structure you experienced (team technical interview, followed by a one on one interview with a leader) is pretty standard for a longer interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
You edited out the rest of your question as I was typing my answer so I'll leave the rest of my answer out - although you seemed stuck on their interest in your history so maybe that's worth a separate question.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
Yes, I edited it out, because I started to see one close vote, so I thought that it needed to be edited.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
I thought it raised a good point, you seem concerned about how to address your consulting/freelancing history in an interview setting, or at least concerned about how your history is being perceived. You might get some good feedback about how to address those concerns if you create a new question focused on that.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:20
I agree with you. It is an issue I would like addressed. I will create a new question regarding my consulting/freelancing history.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:23
add a comment |
Your (pre-edit) question was,
Is that standard?
It's hard to answer what is standard for interviews because policies will vary from position to position and industry to industry. That said, a 3-hour interview is certainly not unusual for many positions, and the structure you experienced (team technical interview, followed by a one on one interview with a leader) is pretty standard for a longer interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
You edited out the rest of your question as I was typing my answer so I'll leave the rest of my answer out - although you seemed stuck on their interest in your history so maybe that's worth a separate question.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
Yes, I edited it out, because I started to see one close vote, so I thought that it needed to be edited.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
I thought it raised a good point, you seem concerned about how to address your consulting/freelancing history in an interview setting, or at least concerned about how your history is being perceived. You might get some good feedback about how to address those concerns if you create a new question focused on that.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:20
I agree with you. It is an issue I would like addressed. I will create a new question regarding my consulting/freelancing history.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:23
add a comment |
Your (pre-edit) question was,
Is that standard?
It's hard to answer what is standard for interviews because policies will vary from position to position and industry to industry. That said, a 3-hour interview is certainly not unusual for many positions, and the structure you experienced (team technical interview, followed by a one on one interview with a leader) is pretty standard for a longer interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
Your (pre-edit) question was,
Is that standard?
It's hard to answer what is standard for interviews because policies will vary from position to position and industry to industry. That said, a 3-hour interview is certainly not unusual for many positions, and the structure you experienced (team technical interview, followed by a one on one interview with a leader) is pretty standard for a longer interview.
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
answered Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
dwizum
11.7k52744
11.7k52744
You edited out the rest of your question as I was typing my answer so I'll leave the rest of my answer out - although you seemed stuck on their interest in your history so maybe that's worth a separate question.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
Yes, I edited it out, because I started to see one close vote, so I thought that it needed to be edited.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
I thought it raised a good point, you seem concerned about how to address your consulting/freelancing history in an interview setting, or at least concerned about how your history is being perceived. You might get some good feedback about how to address those concerns if you create a new question focused on that.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:20
I agree with you. It is an issue I would like addressed. I will create a new question regarding my consulting/freelancing history.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:23
add a comment |
You edited out the rest of your question as I was typing my answer so I'll leave the rest of my answer out - although you seemed stuck on their interest in your history so maybe that's worth a separate question.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
Yes, I edited it out, because I started to see one close vote, so I thought that it needed to be edited.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
I thought it raised a good point, you seem concerned about how to address your consulting/freelancing history in an interview setting, or at least concerned about how your history is being perceived. You might get some good feedback about how to address those concerns if you create a new question focused on that.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:20
I agree with you. It is an issue I would like addressed. I will create a new question regarding my consulting/freelancing history.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:23
You edited out the rest of your question as I was typing my answer so I'll leave the rest of my answer out - although you seemed stuck on their interest in your history so maybe that's worth a separate question.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
You edited out the rest of your question as I was typing my answer so I'll leave the rest of my answer out - although you seemed stuck on their interest in your history so maybe that's worth a separate question.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:09
Yes, I edited it out, because I started to see one close vote, so I thought that it needed to be edited.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
Yes, I edited it out, because I started to see one close vote, so I thought that it needed to be edited.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:10
I thought it raised a good point, you seem concerned about how to address your consulting/freelancing history in an interview setting, or at least concerned about how your history is being perceived. You might get some good feedback about how to address those concerns if you create a new question focused on that.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:20
I thought it raised a good point, you seem concerned about how to address your consulting/freelancing history in an interview setting, or at least concerned about how your history is being perceived. You might get some good feedback about how to address those concerns if you create a new question focused on that.
– dwizum
Dec 18 '18 at 16:20
I agree with you. It is an issue I would like addressed. I will create a new question regarding my consulting/freelancing history.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:23
I agree with you. It is an issue I would like addressed. I will create a new question regarding my consulting/freelancing history.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 16:23
add a comment |
I don't think there is a standard. Shortest interview I had didn't even last 10 minutes (I did get the job), longest I had was 7 hours: twelve 30-minute interviews with peers, followed by a one hour interview by the manager. And I've had everything in between as well.
At my current job, if you get to the stage of face to face interviews (we start off with phone interviews and coding tests), the candidate starts off with 30 minutes with a recruiter (mostly about the process of hiring/relocation), then has 2 one hour interviews with 2 peers (so 4 peers in total), followed by a 30 minute interview from someone from management. And then they see the recruiter again.
From my (limited) experience, both as a candidate, an interviewer, and from talking about others about hiring processes, I'd say that 3 hours is far from unusual.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
add a comment |
I don't think there is a standard. Shortest interview I had didn't even last 10 minutes (I did get the job), longest I had was 7 hours: twelve 30-minute interviews with peers, followed by a one hour interview by the manager. And I've had everything in between as well.
At my current job, if you get to the stage of face to face interviews (we start off with phone interviews and coding tests), the candidate starts off with 30 minutes with a recruiter (mostly about the process of hiring/relocation), then has 2 one hour interviews with 2 peers (so 4 peers in total), followed by a 30 minute interview from someone from management. And then they see the recruiter again.
From my (limited) experience, both as a candidate, an interviewer, and from talking about others about hiring processes, I'd say that 3 hours is far from unusual.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
add a comment |
I don't think there is a standard. Shortest interview I had didn't even last 10 minutes (I did get the job), longest I had was 7 hours: twelve 30-minute interviews with peers, followed by a one hour interview by the manager. And I've had everything in between as well.
At my current job, if you get to the stage of face to face interviews (we start off with phone interviews and coding tests), the candidate starts off with 30 minutes with a recruiter (mostly about the process of hiring/relocation), then has 2 one hour interviews with 2 peers (so 4 peers in total), followed by a 30 minute interview from someone from management. And then they see the recruiter again.
From my (limited) experience, both as a candidate, an interviewer, and from talking about others about hiring processes, I'd say that 3 hours is far from unusual.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
I don't think there is a standard. Shortest interview I had didn't even last 10 minutes (I did get the job), longest I had was 7 hours: twelve 30-minute interviews with peers, followed by a one hour interview by the manager. And I've had everything in between as well.
At my current job, if you get to the stage of face to face interviews (we start off with phone interviews and coding tests), the candidate starts off with 30 minutes with a recruiter (mostly about the process of hiring/relocation), then has 2 one hour interviews with 2 peers (so 4 peers in total), followed by a 30 minute interview from someone from management. And then they see the recruiter again.
From my (limited) experience, both as a candidate, an interviewer, and from talking about others about hiring processes, I'd say that 3 hours is far from unusual.
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
answered Dec 19 '18 at 13:26
Abigail
1,5301411
1,5301411
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124921%2fis-a-three-hour-in-house-interview-that-mostly-covers-work-history-standard%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What does "in-house" mean in this context? As in "on the premises of the new company"? Or "applying to a different job with the same company"?
– Erik
Dec 18 '18 at 15:55
1
@Erik, on the premises of the new company.
– Daniel
Dec 18 '18 at 15:57
I don't know what "In house" means but I had a total 8 hour interview before. 4 hours with 3 managers (IT) and another 4 hour with 3 different managers (Financials). There isn't a standard. Every job/company is different
– Isaiah3015
Dec 18 '18 at 18:25