Isn't Canonical famous for having one of the worst candidate selection processes?
Also, there's a lot of superstition and nonsense about how to succeed at interviews and job applications.
Also, there's a lot of superstition and nonsense about how to succeed at interviews and job applications.
Thank you for applying for Software Engineer. The application process has several stages:
- Initial screening (done)
- Personal essay (this stage)
- Culture interview
- Standardised aptitude and personality tests
- General interviews
- Recruitment screen
- Technical assessment
- Role-specific interviews
- Hiring manager interview
- Executive interview
The current stage is your personal essay. Please take some time to answer the questions below. We’re looking to get a sense of who you are, what’s important to you, and how you communicate. If you’ve already completed this when applying for another role, please feel free to copy/paste from your previous application.
- Beginning in your high school years, through university and into your career, what have you done that you consider exceptional?
- Why do you want to work for XYZ?
- How are you involved in open source software?
- What are your strengths as a software engineer?
- Describe your experience as a Go software engineer.
- Describe your experience with distributed systems.
Writing a Personal Essay after, what sounds like, an automated email is not something I would consider as a good interview process.
canonical’s is indeed a disaster, it’s onerous for applicants (hey that simplified outline doesn’t say it but you can expect between five and fourteen interviews - seriously I know applicants who had fourteen interviews).
Another thing it doesn’t mention is the fact that there’s really no dedicated hiring and interviewing team at Canonical - all engineering teams “pitch in” (read: are forced to) with resume and written interview reviews, as well as in-person interviews.
This wastes a tremendous amount of expensive engineering time, and a lot of this is due to poorly screened resumes. It was very frequent for me to interview a candidate and wonder how they made it to that stage when it was clear from looking at the resume during interview prep that they were totally unsuited for the role.
Source: former Canonical who like everyone else, was forced to “participate” in the hiring process.
Am I so out of touch to expect an application, one interview and maybe a technical assessment for most IT/CompSci jobs? Wouldn't the probationary period be way more effective to see if you fit into the team/company/culture/etc.?
They do read the essay carefully, which is what the OP's article is all about.
I'd rather a company take time to do a thorough assessment of a candidate rather than cavalierly hire one with a high likelihood of dismissal during the trial period, as they may have left an existing job to join.
Is the compensation at Canical that much better than other companies that makes the extra effort worth it?
My information is a decade+ out of date, but Google would perform a recruiter/CV screen, then a technical phone screen, then five technical interviews on one day. And this was all before your CV got in front of the person you'd be reporting to, and before they could say whether they were offering interesting work.
Many other tech companies, having seen Google's success, have decided to ape their interview process.
It comes across like a sort of cargo cult recruitment.
At least one of the FANGs only has 3 or 4 steps, one being a HR contact and another a phone screening.
A 10-step process goes way beyond that.
No, you're not out of touch. Most companies are more like this (although my experience is that most companies will do two interviews -- one that is more social and meant to measure "fit" and one more technical.)
Really?! I'm pretty sure that's illegal.
The restriction only applies to tests which are not a reasonable measure of job performance.
So for example, a test of strength might be allowed for delivery drivers who have to safely handle heavy items, when it wouldn't be allowed for software developers.
Right before the application form they say "We are proud to foster a workplace free from discrimination." Not everybody had the luck to be able to perform at their best in high school, so that looks like a pretty big discriminant right away! And for most people applying to that kind of job that was more than 10 years ago, so I fail to see how it is relevant to a job application.
Some companies even ask for the specific high school.
If you could describe what superstition and nonsense you see in the article, that might be helpful.
What if there is something about following this advice that unwittingly selects for candidates who will make a super long and off-putting interview loop?