That's a good point, but in my experience the founder interview usually takes place last, and only if you've been green lit by the previous interviewers.
I have many times where founders call me right after submitting my application.
There are also times where they are ecstatic at first, but something happens. I don't know - maybe someone's being a bad reference and I have to check on them, or I come off as ragged to them, who knows. Maybe I'm just so honest and candid I talk them out of hiring me.
Part of it is me. In job interviews, I make myself vulnerable, rather than assertive. They already Googled me (whether they admit it or not) and know what I can do. This is someone I'd work for, not an equal. Can I trust them to have integrity and be fair? Because that's what employment is, they have overwhelming power over your life.
Or maybe they move their line of thinking forward, "where are we going to put him?"
I've created open source applications from end-to-end. I have my own way of doing things. I'm enough of a force where people use my software on their machines, import my libraries, and use my documentation. That's a lot to process. Compare that to a fresh candidate on a clean slate that passed their technical screenings. On top of that, there's a couple of hundred to pick from.
Hiring me poses friction and risk. The applicant that passed all the tests conformed and regimented themselves to follow instruction? That's a worker, not a mover/shaker.
See what I mean? It's great to be a "somebody" in a technical field, but sometimes even founders realize their "quest for talent" isn't really so.
But based on this post, I think your issue is you're playing by their rules, doing their take homes and tests, to make it into the pool of "safe picks". Unrealized to many is that hundreds throw themselves at these tests, and they exist only to give the one flipping through resumes less eye strain.
It's not a dignifying experience.
These technical screenings are a sham. They protect entrenched streetwise careerists and lock out honest, reliable people who get stuff done. It promotes imposter syndrome, and wastes thousands of hours of time. This is one of the biggest problems in tech.
To repeat: the reason you don't hear more of this is people don't like to announce they're a failing at "getting a job". It's universal in most cultures being unemployed is being a failure. Understandably, people aren't going to publicly announce their struggle.
They think it's them. Sometimes it is. But if you've interviewed over years, or many many times, you've ruled out the quirks. You're now going to have to come to grips that you're not crazy, that there are systemic realities outside your control pushing you out. Probably ones which don't jive with the ideals of (fairness? merit? esteem?) of being a software developer.
What do you fill your time with, while you're job searching? I don't think you said.
First of all I appreciate what you've written in this thread. It sounds like we've had similar experiences.
> To repeat: the reason you don't hear more of this is people don't like to announce they're a failing at "getting a job".
This is reassuring to hear. It's really easy for me to feel crazy and depressed with the constant rejections. Crazy because I'm constantly being told that I'm not able to do the exact things I've been praised for doing again and again in the past.
> I think your issue is you're playing by their rules
I think you're right. I need to try something else.
> What do you fill your time with, while you're job searching? I don't think you said.
I've kept to my workday routine every day since becoming unemployed. Interviewing takes up a lot of the time. Aside from that I have some side projects that I work on occasionally. However my computer was stolen during the move, and I lost a lot of early prototypes that hadn't yet made it to Github. Sometimes when I try to work on one of those projects I just get caught in depression feedback loop. I released (and sold out!) a record last week, so I'll spend some time this week making a small app to help me fulfill those orders.
There are also times where they are ecstatic at first, but something happens. I don't know - maybe someone's being a bad reference and I have to check on them, or I come off as ragged to them, who knows. Maybe I'm just so honest and candid I talk them out of hiring me.
Part of it is me. In job interviews, I make myself vulnerable, rather than assertive. They already Googled me (whether they admit it or not) and know what I can do. This is someone I'd work for, not an equal. Can I trust them to have integrity and be fair? Because that's what employment is, they have overwhelming power over your life.
Or maybe they move their line of thinking forward, "where are we going to put him?"
I've created open source applications from end-to-end. I have my own way of doing things. I'm enough of a force where people use my software on their machines, import my libraries, and use my documentation. That's a lot to process. Compare that to a fresh candidate on a clean slate that passed their technical screenings. On top of that, there's a couple of hundred to pick from.
Hiring me poses friction and risk. The applicant that passed all the tests conformed and regimented themselves to follow instruction? That's a worker, not a mover/shaker.
See what I mean? It's great to be a "somebody" in a technical field, but sometimes even founders realize their "quest for talent" isn't really so.
But based on this post, I think your issue is you're playing by their rules, doing their take homes and tests, to make it into the pool of "safe picks". Unrealized to many is that hundreds throw themselves at these tests, and they exist only to give the one flipping through resumes less eye strain.
It's not a dignifying experience.
These technical screenings are a sham. They protect entrenched streetwise careerists and lock out honest, reliable people who get stuff done. It promotes imposter syndrome, and wastes thousands of hours of time. This is one of the biggest problems in tech.
To repeat: the reason you don't hear more of this is people don't like to announce they're a failing at "getting a job". It's universal in most cultures being unemployed is being a failure. Understandably, people aren't going to publicly announce their struggle.
They think it's them. Sometimes it is. But if you've interviewed over years, or many many times, you've ruled out the quirks. You're now going to have to come to grips that you're not crazy, that there are systemic realities outside your control pushing you out. Probably ones which don't jive with the ideals of (fairness? merit? esteem?) of being a software developer.
What do you fill your time with, while you're job searching? I don't think you said.