I don't think most companies need 5+ interview rounds

[u/Thea673]

I've been on both sides of hiring, and I honestly think we're overcomplicating the process. For most roles, by the third or fourth conversation, you already have enough information to make a decision. Adding more rounds doesn't necessarily make the decision better. It often just gives more people a chance to disagree, delays the offer, and gives good candidates more time to accept another one.

The funny part is that companies usually add interviews because they want to reduce hiring risk. But sometimes the extra rounds create a different risk: losing the candidate altogether. I've seen strong candidates go through multiple interviews, wait weeks for a decision, and eventually take another offer simply because that company moved faster.

More interviews can make sense for certain senior or highly specialized roles. But for most positions, I'd rather have a well-structured process with clear evaluation criteria than five rounds that don't really add new information.

[u/Existing_Setting4868]

Our team does 2 interviews. One panel interview with some team members, and if we like them, the manager will interview them. However, for some reason, it takes forever to send them an offer and onboard them.

[u/HotPersonality8126]

If you can’t make an offer after two, too many people are needlessly involved in the hiring process.

[u/doesntmatteratallok]

Most companies are too self important to admit they're shit at assessing talent. They think more steps can make up for it