Ask HN: (how) do you early reject candidates during onsite interviews?

I'd be strongly inclined, especially in the current hiring environment, to do whatever else was on the schedule anyway -- finish the interviews, take the candidate to lunch, <i>sell them on the desirability of working at your company</i>, whatever, <i>even if I received obvious signals that it was not a mutual fit</i>.<p>The rationale is partially "Even if this particular candidate does not end up working for our organization, our treatment of them <i>will</i> be repeated to their friends, who -- since birds of a feather flock together -- likely include other people who we may be interested in hiring."<p>(And partially it is just that I cannot contort my mind into believing that any serious professional could think that "Our multinational telecommunications company lost your interviwer. <i>Whoops!</i> Happens all the time -- door's on the left, security will see you out" is acceptable outside a Dilbert strip.)

<i>"we can't find your final interviewer"</i><p>This is clearly disingenuous, and accomplishes nothing other than to to convey a palpable sense of contempt and disregard for the candidate. It's an insult to their intelligence, basically.

It's been a long time (late '90s) since I've seen a formalized (documented) interview process. It helped immensely. We basically treated recruiting like a sales funnel, had a ranking/scoring system, had self-selecting teams, etc.<p>Since then, seems like everyone's just making it up as they go. Hiring, evals, reqs, QA/test, whatever. The pinnacle of methodology may have sucked, but at least we all pretended to try.<p>When I interview candidates now, when it's a "no", I chop it off asap. I give precise reasons why, as nicely as possible. It's fair, honest, constructive, and is how I would want to be treat. I also believe in the Roman Evaluation Method, where anything less than a yes by everyone is a no.<p>Alas, I'm a solo act in a large organization. eg, Another interviewer, even after it's a clear "No" (we compare notes via IM), let's things drag on, always doing the "do you have any questions for us?" bit, and then wraps up with a "our people will contact you..."

Whenever we participate in on-site interviews, candidates have been vetted enough through phone interviews that you should hardly have to face a very bad candidate that you want to reject right away on-site. However, even if that is the case, the perception of a bad candidate could vary from interviewer to interviewer. If I was personally called for an on-site interview and rejected <i>early</i> just on the basis of couple of interviewers, I would be upset at that moment but probably be glad later. Interviewing should be collaborative and if you have scheduled a candidate to come on-site, the least you can do is to give him/her the chance to speak to <i>everyone</i> who is supposed to interview and <i>then</i> decide. Otherwise, it reflects bad on your culture. Just my personal opinion.

I remember interviewing at a start up where I was repeatedly clearly told through the interview process that if at any point they found me lacking, they would cut short the process. Although, I enjoyed their process (purely from a technical perspective), I definitely had the impression that they were a bunch of dicks and would definitely not recommend them to friends. Having said that, I think theirs was a much more rational policy than telling the candidate they can't find the interviewer which borders on the incredulous.

Who's the most important person in your software development shop on any given day? The one you're interviewing. This person is, hopefully, your future.<p>What's the most important part of your job if you're a software developer in a pre-revenue startup? Hiring people who are smarter than you.<p>If you don't believe that, do your colleagues and investors a favor and quit.<p>I'm serious.

As I learned to do phone screens, some people made it past me into an onsite interview that really wouldn't have come close to getting a job. After meeting two or three of us, we just told our internal recruiters that they weren't suitable and would just be a waste of everyone's time to hold their interview schedule. The recruiters just come in and end the interview, being relatively noncommittal. It's still after at least three interviews, so it's not like they're being chucked out on their ear after a few minutes.<p>I felt pretty terrible about it since it was 100% my fault that they wasted their time by coming in, but time is too valuable to throw good after bad...

I never had much problem ending an interview early. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen that after about 10 minutes I know this person had 0% chance of getting hired. They just don't have the technical skills I am looking for, let alone the other skills my bosses would need. I usually talk with them til the 20/25 minute mark and thank them for coming and show them to the door.<p>They don't need to know that there were other interviewers lined up after. And the others are thankful the "guaranteed no's" don't get to them.