Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by saghm 880 days ago
Yeah, if I were someone working at a company having gone through the "normal" hiring process and then someone new joined my team and I found out they didn't have to go through it because they thought it was a waste of time and they were friends with the founder, that would feel pretty shitty.
1 comments
em-bee 880 days ago
it depends on their previous relationship. if they have worked together before then the test should be redundant. so why should i feel bothered that they didn't have to do a test?
link
saintfire 880 days ago
If the founder is not really involved with the hiring team then you are essentially going over them without them having any idea how you work.

While I know what you're saying that the founder is vouching for your experience, its still going to cause friction, I think. Especially, again, to all the people that fought for the job.

link
em-bee 880 days ago
sure, i am thinking of cases where the founder is still involved with hiring, and especially more so, where the founder is the lead developer and still coding.

i agree with you that once the company is large enough that the founder is no longer involved with hiring decisions then they should not just go over the hiring team.

more specifically, as in this article: https://www.cio.com/article/236189/5-reasons-ceos-should-be-...

i am talking about smaller companies that don't yet have senior management and HR teams

link