4 Comments

  1. Ahmad Awais

    Learnt quite a lot from this process. Especially the Skype texting instead of scheduling.

    Report

  2. beauvoir

    This sounds horrible. Poor applicants. They waste a lot of time, complete the “trial project consists of work that would normally be completed by existing exmployees”, and when refused they are neither financially compensated for their work nor even get an explanation. Work for free for a profit-oriented company as “part of the hiring process” then get kicked out with a big fat nothing. Capitalism at its best.

    Report

  3. John Locke

    This system is somewhat similar to how other remote-friendly companies screen and onboard new hires. I’ve read that Treehouse also does paid projects with candidates before hiring. This is good for both the hiring companies and the candidates. Each party gets to see what it would be like working with the other. Communication styles are assessed. Real work that needs to get done by the hiring company gets done, and the candidate is properly compensated for their time.

    The major difference between paid projects for candidates at Treehouse and Automattic is Treehouse pays you at your normal rate, while Automattic sets the same rate for everyone, $25/hour.

    I think this is the most fair way to take candidates to the final stage before hiring.

    One person mentioned their frustration at not knowing why they did not advance in the selection process. While we all want to improve and analyze what happened in a situation like that, the hiring company may not be advised to disclose specific details by their human resources or legal departments.

    “Silence is golden”, if you will.

    Report

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: