Consider that FAANG-style interviews are pretty expensive to conduct.
Consider that the big tech companies could agree on some kind of standardized test to replace much of the worst of the interviews—but haven't.
Consider that they often make you leetcode even if you've already passed their interviews before, even if you've passed a couple other leetcode-style companies' interviews before, and so on.
Recall that several of the top-paying tech companies got busted illegally colluding to keep salaries down once already.
Conclusion: making developers more reluctant to switch jobs is one of the main purposes of FAANG-type interview processes, and is likely a core part of their current salary-suppression scheme.
Interesting. I'd quibble with the degree of certainty in the last paragraph, but this is an interesting take with some concrete observations behind it.
In my very recent experience (specifically in the UK for roles to do with Ruby), the shirtage of developers mean it's way less painful than it used to be, cos companies are marketing themselves on their ease of interview process. I went from sending out CVs to getting a good offer in a week, and that offer was from a 1-stage, 1-hour interview process. Don't get me wrong, I basically spent that entire week on the phone to recruiters, but still, massive improvement on the last time I was in the market.
Consider that the big tech companies could agree on some kind of standardized test to replace much of the worst of the interviews—but haven't.
Consider that they often make you leetcode even if you've already passed their interviews before, even if you've passed a couple other leetcode-style companies' interviews before, and so on.
Recall that several of the top-paying tech companies got busted illegally colluding to keep salaries down once already.
Conclusion: making developers more reluctant to switch jobs is one of the main purposes of FAANG-type interview processes, and is likely a core part of their current salary-suppression scheme.