Hacker News Reader

I can see how you would do this for a technical shortcoming, but sometimes the choice of one candidate over another comes based on a personality judgement and who would fit better with the current team. How do you explain those types of decisions without sounding arbitrary?

View on HN

Second round interviews, after having passed a code test as well, I do exclusively with the team in question all present.

It's less of an interview and more of a meet and greet, and we spend 30 minutes talking about anything under the sun.

The team makes the decision from this point. I very rarely veto.

Candidates know this is the process, because I tell them about it before hand. Does that make sense?

So you would tell a candidate rejected in this stage that the team chose someone else? More or less detail than that?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com