I was under the impression that it was sort of like Harvard: lots of applications, but a good chunk of those denied could have just have easily been accepted if there was space
You seem to have experience with their hiring and I have none (only applying) so I have much more faith in what you're saying than my preconceived ideas.
In addition, basic statistics suggests you need all new hires to be better than 50% of the existing company, or your average skill level will go down, which makes hiring just hard mathematically.
>In addition, basic statistics suggests you need all new hires to be better than 50% of the existing company,
This seems especially difficult when hiring graduates/junior roles due to the lack of unknowns.
Thanks for taking the time to respond!
I think all companies do this, but it's really easy to game the metrics. People do it unconsciously, even.
> This seems especially difficult when hiring graduates/junior roles due to the lack of unknowns.
Yep, so it takes hours of interviewing per candidate, across dozens of candidates just to hire to minimise the risk for one role. At a global level, FAANGs are hiring loads, but at a team/local level there's never enough people due to specific team needs or turnover.