I don't understand the point of multiple (or very long) interviews. If they can't decide after the first 30 minutes if the candidate is hirarable, they probably won't.
It's an illusion to think that interview environments relate directly to workplace performance. Interviews are mostly useful for the subjective parts than for grilling candidates in hopes of avoiding a bad hire. Going through all the hoops and knowing all the things doesn't make for a good employee. Not unless you're being hired as a robot worked in some factory floor.
Also, unlike what seems to be the general idea elsewhere on this thread, soft skills are very important, I argue even more important than hard skills. If you have any ability to learn (which may be considered a soft skill) you can pick up almost any technology and implement almost any algorithm. Not so if you lack the ability to relate to you coworkers, work effectively as a team, or clearly communicate your ideas.
You can learn tools, but you either have the right attitude or you don't.
I agree. You cannot fake good nature and attitude during all day interviews. At least, I cannot. Soft skills and communication are really important in any team environment.
But, how would one go about determining whether someone is a quick learner? That beats me.
You don't determine it directly. But quick learning comes with other traits, like curiosity. You can determine those during a conversation if you're a good interviewer (which is the catch, interviewing is also a skill).
Sometimes you'll fail. But I've yet to see convincing proof that the alternative reduces failures (but it does reduce the willingness of people to admit failure).
I don't understand the point of multiple (or very long) interviews. If they can't decide after the first 30 minutes if the candidate is hirarable, they probably won't.
It's an illusion to think that interview environments relate directly to workplace performance. Interviews are mostly useful for the subjective parts than for grilling candidates in hopes of avoiding a bad hire. Going through all the hoops and knowing all the things doesn't make for a good employee. Not unless you're being hired as a robot worked in some factory floor.
Also, unlike what seems to be the general idea elsewhere on this thread, soft skills are very important, I argue even more important than hard skills. If you have any ability to learn (which may be considered a soft skill) you can pick up almost any technology and implement almost any algorithm. Not so if you lack the ability to relate to you coworkers, work effectively as a team, or clearly communicate your ideas.
You can learn tools, but you either have the right attitude or you don't.