[mwd_]

This is particularly interesting because it is common to hear complaints that (A) it is hard to find "good" people, and (B) it is hard to go through huge quantities of resumes. If those are both true then clearly it's time to worry about false negatives. Maybe failing to hire isn't such a big deal? Maybe there's an element of bravado in claiming that nobody's good enough? Or is a lot of tech hiring just horribly misguided? I'm not sure.

Personally I've got to say that I also find the "rock star" rhetoric to be a huge turn-off. When I see it in a job ad I think of how horrible it would be to have to work with a club of self-described "A" players.

The gruelling interviews are another perverse system that I think has a negative effect. If you can easily get lots of interviews are you going to bother with the five stage interview with four hours of quiz questions and "homework"?

[incongruity]

Well – the one thing I'll say is that interview processes like that screen out people who are both good and know what they're worth – which is one of the subtle subtexts in much of the hiring processes being discussed/described here – everyone wants the cheap rockstar – not the rockstar that expects rockstar prices and rockstar access... or well, few people do and those people don't use these sorts of hiring mechanisms.