edit: I love this community! Thank you so much for all the insight. For those who complained, I'm sorry if this post comes across as complainy or redundant, I respect the HN hive-mind and was genuinely curious about everyone's thoughts on the matter.
Hello fellow travelers, I'll do my best to keep this brief(ish).
I've been in IT professionally since Y2K, data entry->QA->SysAdmin->PM->consultant->founder->sold and with the money took some years off, bought some property and a fixer upper and went to school and got a BSBA degree (never graduated from high school but wanted to show my kids the importance of a degree). I missed working and creating things with people so decided to reenter the job market in the PM space. So now that my hat is in the ring I have been told by recruiters what I need to "expect" in this "new market."
I was told "5 to 7 interviews is normal". What? I genuinely feel like I'm having a 'Blast from the Past' moment in this whole thing (good 90s romcom kids, look it up).
When did a hiring manager lose their authority and the trust of the organization to do their job? Am I just out of touch? How is a process like this in any way shape or form efficient or productive? Am i missing something? HN, please help!
First: we no longer trust the hiring manager alone, because probably they aren't a strong developer. We instead trust strong developers that are well trained at evaluating good devs. At the same time, we don't want to thrust a dev onto a hiring manager, so they also need to interview you too and have a say.
Second: Is it really fair to have just one or two developers evaluate you? When I first was an interviewer, I liked everybody! I would have hired them all. So getting multiple data points matters. Best to have at least a couple dev interviews.
Then there's the whole problem of needing to evaluate you on multiple dimensions. Can one interview really tell if you're good problem solving, coding, algorithms/data structures, and any specialization the role has? What about the soft skills aspect? We're going to need to have at least 3 or 4 interviews to cover all these aspects. These roles pay a huge sum of money, so there's a lot of worry that someone will be hired who doesn't really meet the bar, you know?
But now we have a bigger problem: if we're going to invest 4+ people to spend an hour of time with you each, we'd better have some data points that you're worth that investment. So maybe we need one or two initial interviews ahead of time to weed out any obviously unlikely candidates.
After that, it's every other company going "Oh shit, Amazon does 6 interviews? We should do that too!".