Chetan Vyas’ Post

I’m not suggesting every role should be filled in 3 days. In this case, the role was urgent, and the candidate was immediately available, so we could act fast. But ideally, interview processes should be streamlined, aiming to wrap things up within 2-3 weeks. You don’t need to stretch it over 2 months. A simple, efficient process benefits both the company and the candidate!

For that a lot of stars need to align. This looked like a one-off scenario. If this repeats then it's magic.... And those of you reading this believe to be a part of such magic then- 🔸I built "products" in 2 startups in the mobility space. -An app to report traffic violations & a social network of geo-tagged videos captured off the roads. 🔸Can add lot of value during the 0-1 journeys and the 1-10s. 🔸I can hit the ground running in domains where people or goods are moving, but not limited to just these 🔸Have a strong product sense that can help here 🔸Can start from tomorrow 🔸Looking for a lot of learnings & growth Can you afford to miss out on me?

Chetan Vyas that was just something I was going to post today but you got the lead 😂...Well you have stated truth I am also facing this issues with several companies which take months to reply

Talent acquisition is never 'one-size-fits-all". An effective hiring process should balance speed with thorough evaluation. Quick, agile hiring works well for certain positions, especially entry-level. However, senior roles with broader responsibilities may benefit from a more structured approach, incorporating technical assessments, behavioral interviews, and evaluations of cultural fit. While simplifying the hiring process has clear advantages, a universal rapid-hiring model may not be feasible for every role. In my personal opinion, streamline the process when possible while maintaining depth for strategic or high-impact positions.

Chetan Vyas I have seen the candidate profile in LinkedIn, called him and sent the offer letter. It took just 5 mins. Why don’t you try this?? Jokes apart, in your case your lucky enough to get a candidate in the first go. Every time it’s not possible and there are multiple factors involved to choose the right candidate and hence need time to select the right candidate. Candidate selection is not a magic it’s a process

I once accompanied a friend of mine for shopping. We went to a store where we found something we both liked and even negotiated for a price we thought we were willing to pay. It was a big market and there were plenty of stores around. Despite, we could have decided on the product of our liking for a good price, my friend did not seem fully satisfied as it was the first shop we stepped on. We moved on and spent a great deal of our efforts looking and exploring other options for the rest of the evening. BTW we ended up ‘NOT’ buying and lost interest. Then we had an amazing dinner and called it a day. We then returned a week later to buy what we had initially finalised, only to find out that the product was already sold. We moved on again in hope of finding something “BETTER”.

The question to be asked is: why was the requirement urgent in the first place.

You need clarity to work at this speed. Nowadays I find most JD has a long Wishlist rather than an actionable search for talent. They want someone who is a plus plus of multiple skills. They start with this JD, interview few candidates, reject them and then relook at their JD. Finally, some guy who meets less than 50% of the initial JD ends up in the job.

It’s becoming increasingly common for companies to create an illusion of exclusivity by stretching their hiring processes to 5-8 interview rounds over several months. Candidates are often asked the same set of questions repeatedly, with each round feeling more like a repeat performance than a deeper exploration of their skills and potential. While thoroughness in hiring is important, such extended processes can lead candidates to question the company’s clarity in decision-making and respect for their time. It’s worth asking—does a drawn-out interview process really equate to a better hire, or is it simply creating unnecessary barriers for talent? Let’s rethink our approach to make the hiring process fair, efficient, and respectful to all involved.

I agree that a streamlined hiring process can be effective, and in many cases, a quick decision is better for both the company and the candidate. But there’s another side to this. Some companies have more complex environments or leadership structures, where multiple interviews or tests are needed to evaluate fit across different teams or to ensure long-term compatibility. It's not always about overcomplicating the process, but about being thorough, especially when hiring for critical roles.