I’d be surprised if Open Philanthropy routinely lost good candidates to the length of their hiring process; if this happened, I don’t think it came up in their analysis of their biggest (?) hiring round.
(I do think orgs should be thinking carefully about all the stages of their interview processes and looking for good tradeoffs between time and information on candidates. Open Phil certainly does this already, but I’m not sure about other orgs.)
Empirically, the single hiring process I’ve run for an EA org didn’t lose anyone; every candidate I asked to schedule an interview did so, and every candidate who got through to the second-round work test completed it.
I think I may have wasted candidates’ time in the first round by assigning an editing task that was too long, but the length of that initial test was in line with other industries’ initial requirements, and I hope that I “gave back” some EA time by not requiring a formal cover letter, accepting LinkedIn in lieu of resumes, etc.
I’m not sure how public the hiring methodology is, but if it’s fully public then I’d expect the candidates to be ‘lost’ before the point of sending in a CV.
If it’s less public that would be less likely, though perhaps the best candidates (assuming they consider applying for jobs at all, and aren’t always just headhunted) would only apply to jobs that had a transparent methodology that revealed a short hiring process.
I’d be surprised if Open Philanthropy routinely lost good candidates to the length of their hiring process; if this happened, I don’t think it came up in their analysis of their biggest (?) hiring round.
(I do think orgs should be thinking carefully about all the stages of their interview processes and looking for good tradeoffs between time and information on candidates. Open Phil certainly does this already, but I’m not sure about other orgs.)
Empirically, the single hiring process I’ve run for an EA org didn’t lose anyone; every candidate I asked to schedule an interview did so, and every candidate who got through to the second-round work test completed it.
I think I may have wasted candidates’ time in the first round by assigning an editing task that was too long, but the length of that initial test was in line with other industries’ initial requirements, and I hope that I “gave back” some EA time by not requiring a formal cover letter, accepting LinkedIn in lieu of resumes, etc.
I’m not sure how public the hiring methodology is, but if it’s fully public then I’d expect the candidates to be ‘lost’ before the point of sending in a CV.
If it’s less public that would be less likely, though perhaps the best candidates (assuming they consider applying for jobs at all, and aren’t always just headhunted) would only apply to jobs that had a transparent methodology that revealed a short hiring process.