This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Existentior · M
To answer your question: yes, that is likely a positive sign. Imagine if they would have to spend 3 minutes per non-accepted candidate, they would lose a lot of time and money.
There is a standard job procedure: sometimes it's 2 interviews but mostly 3:
1) Get to know the candidate
2) Technical test
3) Personality test: a measured, digital test and a conversation with the CEO (will the candidate fit the company culture?)
Number 3 is especially difficult to get through. If you have your skills down, then 1 and 2 are a breeze.. but number 3 is always the sour apple; either you fit with the people in the company or you don't. What sucks even more is that more and more HR people take expensive FBI and interrogation training to see, among other signals, through your body language, voice and logic of your story if you are lying or not.
Yeah, it's a tough world out there.
There is a standard job procedure: sometimes it's 2 interviews but mostly 3:
1) Get to know the candidate
2) Technical test
3) Personality test: a measured, digital test and a conversation with the CEO (will the candidate fit the company culture?)
Number 3 is especially difficult to get through. If you have your skills down, then 1 and 2 are a breeze.. but number 3 is always the sour apple; either you fit with the people in the company or you don't. What sucks even more is that more and more HR people take expensive FBI and interrogation training to see, among other signals, through your body language, voice and logic of your story if you are lying or not.
Yeah, it's a tough world out there.