[jawns]

What do you think of the practice of ending an interview earlier than scheduled when you're quite sure that the candidate is not a good fit for the position?

The rationale I've heard is that it saves both you and the candidate time.

But in practice, during the times when I've seen it done, the candidate ends up feeling really hurt.

[chrisco255]

Terrible practice. Unless the candidate themselves is rude or doing something totally off base. That has to be really rare. Your pre-screen process should prevent most of the completely unqualified candidates from getting in the door. From there, once invited to your company, it's important to treat people with respect. Besides that being just generally good life advice for Any Situation, it makes good business sense too. People talk, and if I hear a company has a bunch of asshole interviewers that cut people off, I'm not gonna apply there. I'm gonna assume the entire company is assholes.

[HillRat]

I have ended a few interviews early when I was absolutely certain that a candidate wasn't a fit, but only when they were objectively not right for a position. What I try to do in those cases is end the main interview set gracefully, then take the candidate in for a one-on-one and talk to them about where their skills don't fit, and what kind of position they would have more success searching for.

In general, my belief is that any time a candidate reaches out, they're putting faith in me to treat them with the respect they deserve -- everyone is a good fit somewhere, and I have no time for people who want to use interviews as a chance to prove their intellectual superiority or to band the team against a possibly inferior "outsider." Same thing with using whiteboard-heavy interviews as a weapon -- I have yet to hit upon the secret sauce for finessing a candidate who might be a great fit but is floundering with the stress of a whiteboard problem, but I do try very hard to not make them feel like they're failing, while seeing if they can approach the problem in a rigorous manner.

[Paul_S]

Please do. Rejection hurts the same no matter how it's delivered and saving time lets both of us get a better chance to find what we want quicker.

[draw_down]

Ugh, that sounds exactly like something an engineer would come up with. Saves time, right? It's more efficient so it's better. Except it doesn't even pretend to give the candidate a chance to save face, it's just naked rejection. But why should that matter, it's just emotions, it's not rational.

[JackMorgan]

When I tell them it's X hours, it's X hours, even if we have to start doing katas together pair programming. I therefore try to make certain I want to spend that much time with them before I bring them into an interview.

[ousta]

You should always end an interview earlier if you are 100% sure that the candidate is not a good fit. If it is under the 100% you should continue you never know what the candidate can reveal later on.

[debacle]

As long as you do it constructively, it's fine. Picking up your things and showing them the door isn't very constructive.