Yes, raising the bar would make the interviews more useful. This is a good thought that makes a lot of sense to me.
I think what you said makes sense and is logical.
Since I’m far away and uninformed, I think I’m more reluctant to say anything about the process and there could be other explanations.
For example, maybe Ben or his team wanted to meet with many applicants because he/they viewed them highly and cared about their EA activities beyond CEA, and this interview had a lot of value, like a sort of general 1on1.
The “vision” for the hiring process might be different. For example, maybe Ben’s view was to pass anyone who met resume screening. For the interview, maybe he just wanted to use it to make candidates feel there was appropriate interest from CEA, before asking them to invest in a vigorous trial exercise.
Ben seems to think hard about issues of recruiting and exclusivity, and has used these two posts to express and show a lot of investment in making things fair.
Yes, raising the bar would make the interviews more useful. This is a good thought that makes a lot of sense to me.
I think what you said makes sense and is logical.
Since I’m far away and uninformed, I think I’m more reluctant to say anything about the process and there could be other explanations.
For example, maybe Ben or his team wanted to meet with many applicants because he/they viewed them highly and cared about their EA activities beyond CEA, and this interview had a lot of value, like a sort of general 1on1.
The “vision” for the hiring process might be different. For example, maybe Ben’s view was to pass anyone who met resume screening. For the interview, maybe he just wanted to use it to make candidates feel there was appropriate interest from CEA, before asking them to invest in a vigorous trial exercise.
Ben seems to think hard about issues of recruiting and exclusivity, and has used these two posts to express and show a lot of investment in making things fair.