Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Six rounds of Interviews

  • 23-02-2026 09:25AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 646 ✭✭✭


    I have been dipping my toe into the job market the past few months. I’m in the lucky position where I am not desperate to leave my job just on the lookout for something new and more interesting, I’m in IT and lead a team across EMEA. I have noticed that a lot of places are doing multi round interviews, one recent experience was a large US Multinational and they wanted to have 6 interviews, HR Screening, Hiring manager and then four of my potential peers. This particular place only told me of the four peer interviews after I passed the hiring manager conversation. That was a bit of a red flag to me so I pulled out, and they have now re-advertised the job.

    I curious to see if anyone else is seeing the same level of interviews and if you would have done the same as me and dropped out. I half feel like I’m being lazy but I think it says a lot about company culture as well, as in they don’t have internal processes in order, and for sure a large company this would be worrying.



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,324 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    The six part (or more) interview has become the norm for many of the Multinationals. About 20 years ago I did 7 rounds of interviews at Google and was then told they didn't feel I was enthusiastic enough about technology.

    During my career, I've been on both sides of the interviewing desk. Usually if you can't get the information you need from a candidate, or you are unable to get your message across in a one hour interview, then at least one of you is doing something wrong. Unless it was a role in a company I particularly liked or wanted, I have a policy now of not doing multiple stages of interviews. Two-three, okay. six, seven or more, no.

    As you are just dipping your toe in as you put it, I would have continued with the process to see where it went. It's when you are actively looking for work, 6 plus interviews is an expense and a time sink. Six hours of interviews, plus six+ hours of prep, and/or time to get to the interview if it's onsite.. honestly Ive had relationships that were shorter!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,111 ✭✭✭ILikeBoats


    I would've done the same as you OP. I also would have said to the recruiter that it should have been disclosed about how many rounds there were and made it known that 6 is ridiculous. If I was unemployed or really desperate to leave the current job, I'd go through with it, but toe-dipping, no way.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 22,097 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Biggest issue is managers not taking responsibility for hiring. Twenty years ago the HR abd hiring manager would sit on a panel with a works area manager and do the interview.

    Now neither of them want the responsibility so they want to hand the poison chalice to workers in the area. 4 peer interviews is crazy. If the peers cannot manage to arrange there schedule where two of them can interview you at the time then you are as well out of it. You get the impression that the four peers are not getting on with each other and need to be managed as well

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,119 ✭✭✭daheff


    any reason why they couldnt condense this to two interviews with the hiring teams on the call together? individual multiple interviews with multiple people is just a huge waste of everybody's time



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,574 ✭✭✭✭dulpit


    I work in IT, our crowd (~400ish staff across multiple countries) has policy of 2 interview rounds. The seniority of the role will dictate who goes to those interviews, not how many rounds there'll be.

    6 is ridiculous, especially "peer interviews". That just feels like a manager who can't make their own decisions…



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 646 ✭✭✭Dublinflyer


    It's interesting to see how it's gone with several rounds, like you if it was a role I was really after then I may put the time in but I was not feeling it with this.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 646 ✭✭✭Dublinflyer


    I see that in my current place, managers not wanting to make a call without getting lots of others involved. It did occur to me that at least two of them could get together and shorten the process, you are right that should be an alarm bell as well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,324 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    Now a days you are interviewing them just as much as they are interviewing you. I wonder if the reason some places find it difficult to hire is because the 6 interviews is enough time for potential candidates to get a weird vibe off the company, a bit like you did.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,324 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    It might be hard to arrange if you have teams spread across a wide geographical area. That would be the excuse any way. As others have said, there is a real I would say fear nowadays of people taking responsibility.

    Manager: Well you interviewed him @daheff and you thought he was quite good

    You: Yeah but I also said I had a niggling feeling so I asked @LambshankRedemption to interview him/her too and provide their feedback

    (thinly veiled, it wasn't all on you.)

    4 peer interviews means each person only takes 25% of the blame if it turns out the guy was feeding the questions into ChatGPT and it turns out opening a web browser is their only technical skill.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 361 ✭✭Dr.Tom


    Once upon a time on 2016 I done 3 interviews for a job in a multinational company.

    My take on it was they were justifying a “managers” role for interviewing potential candidates.

    6 seems ridiculous.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 22,097 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    I do not accept that peer interviews could not be reduced to two at the most. The impression you get from a setup like that is that these peolle think thete time is more vaulable than anyone else's. The two managers requiring separate interviews and knowing the process required peer interviews is a bit strange to me.

    The candidate may have to take time off to attend intertviews, 6 half days or possibly full days gone.

    Even if the peers are on shift, on call or geographical issues if they cannot stay back a morning or come in a morning if WFH or have to team.up.on the interview process.

    If I was a manager involved in that process I definitely have told people to double up. As.well I would never have allowed 4 peers to interview a potential colleague 2 maybe but not 4

    Post edited by Bass Reeves on

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,015 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    There was a lot of this in 2008/09, when multinationals especially postponed projects, dropped contractors and kept permanent staff busy doing make-work like interviewing candidates for positions that would never be filled.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,392 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Common with the big US multis. I know someone who did 5 with Microsoft - 2 of them were the exact same interview with different people - and then on the 6th and apparently final interview they left him sat there for an hour and the interviewer came in and started as if it was the first interview.

    All the while my mate had to make up excuses as to why he was leaving the office every few days for hours at a time.

    Sign of a shiutty culture. Avoid.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,487 ✭✭✭RebelButtMunch


    Yeah, I'm in that circus at the moment and it's 4 interviews at least for a role.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,710 ✭✭✭dmakc


    I went 8 rounds with a multinational and came second. Happier to miss out looking back.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,876 ✭✭✭Ben Bailey


    Look at the process as if it was a 'date'. The people most directly involved arrange to meet and discuss a possible future arrangement. Then a few weeks later they meet again, but this time with their friend, then a few weeks later their mother comes along ...

    Ffs, just make a decision. Not every relationship will work out, but starting out like this imo makes it more likely that it will fail through a loss of trust.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 646 ✭✭✭Dublinflyer


    I was told I was down to the last three, but I noticed that the role was closed to new applicants but has opened up again. So I wonder was I closer than they said, or did the other two do the same.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,716 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    I went 7 rounds plus a task with a consultancy that services US tech MNCs last year, and didn't get it. All while doing a 5-days-in-office role so trying to fit interviews in around that. Complete and utter waste of time and I'll never put myself through that kind of nonsense again. Unless it's a CEO you're hiring, if you need 7+ rounds to make your mind up about someone, there's something wrong with your process.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 890 ✭✭✭SodiumCooled


    This multi-round interview stuff is madness really, I had one friend in the US have to go for a full day 9 - 5 of back to back interviews with multiple different people and teams for a job (that at least got). It wasn't even a very senior role or anything like that. That sort of nonsense seems to be creeping in here.

    I have never done more than one interview for a job. My last employer started to bring in multiple rounds and I pretty much said it was rubbish. I have done plenty of interviews and to be honest my mind was usually made up based on the CV, a 30 minute interview would be all I'd need. Maybe a second round with HR absolute max but going through multiple managers, some with little clue of the actual role or skillset being interview for was an awful waste of time.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,324 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    Great analogy. In the US more so(over here it seems to vary from person to person), the third date is considered the "special" date if you know what I mean. By then you will already have spent the guts of 3 hours with someone. There really should be no need for more than 3 interviews to decide if someone is worth hiring, and it really should not take anymore than 3-4 weeks max.

    It's ironic considering everyone is so contactable now, that email and communication seems slower now than it was 20 years ago.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,480 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    complete nonsense and time wasting. If you’re already in a job it’s completely impractical. Unless it was absolutely dream job there’s no way and even then it would be a red flag



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 646 ✭✭✭Dublinflyer


    It really wasn't I can tell you. I was honest with them and told them that this many interviews for a role at this level was a red flag. As one person said if there is an issue getting some or all of them on the same call then it suggests bigger issues internally.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 9,468 ✭✭✭markpb


    I interviewed for a Microsoft SRE-type role a few years ago. They wanted to do 4 interviews plus a task so they booked a whole day, brought me in at 10am, did the interviews, the task, and lunch and send me home at 4pm and they had an offer out in the same week. If you're going to put someone through that process, this is the way to do it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 263 ✭✭HurlingBoy


    I think you really need to be committed to job hunting and be in the right frame of mind. I would think 4 rounds is about average for most mid - senior roles. If you really want to leave your job and really want the job you are interviewing for you will do whatever it takes to get it. It can feel like a waste of time if you don't get the job but it's all practice and experience.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,480 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    yep it suggests they’re all working in little silos and no one is talking to each other. A complete disregard and I would say disrespect of the applicants time and energy also- “we are all super busy but we couldn’t give a fcuk about your time”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,128 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    i think its a way for them to inflate the importance of the role and the company, usual US tech co nonsense, i did it once, i wouldnt do it again, i have been paid multiples of that salary in other roles since and had to do max 2 interviews which were more back and forth discussions that formal interviews.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 11,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007



    If you get to past the initial intervew phases it means they expect that have got the skills necessary to do the job. After that the big question is will you fit in with the people who are already there. If the job is a senior one or critical in some way and you need to be able to fit with serveral people, then it may very well be that you will be required to meet with several people on the team. Nobody can tell you if it was the right thing for you to do or not. It's how they do business, you did not like it, so it probably is not the place for you.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,781 ✭✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    Testing if you’ll “fit in” though is part of the probationary period - having 4 peer interviews is a terrible sign of a company because quite simply, they’re going to end up recruiting a similar type of person to themselves- that’s not necessarily in the best interests of the company.
    Most companies these days want new energy, progressive, being able to reinvent, adaptable, etc etc If your peers want stability and doing things the way we’ve always done them, then how will the company survive and thrive?

    In addition, peers will discriminate against people whom they view as a potential threat to their own future or career progression ie “don’t mind if you’re good, just don’t be as good as me”

    Madness- you likely dodged a bullet OP- what a time sink exercise



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,851 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    I hope they did.

    Companies at this don't sound the best to work for.

    As someone has stated above, you'd get a good feel for a person after 30-45 minutes and perhaps two of these are all that is required. When companies are putting off candidates they deem good enough to interview in the first place, because of multiple rounds of BS they really aren't gonna end up with good people at the end of the process - it puts them off.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 646 ✭✭✭Dublinflyer


    I think my current place has it just right, it's a 10 minute informal HR interview, then the hiring manager and depending on the role maybe a tech but we know the person is interviewing us as well so we try put a good image forward.



Advertisement
Advertisement