Have heard 2 opposing views: one is to interview early, even when you're unlikely to take the job so that you gain interview experience.
The other side is that, because recruiting is so time intensive, you shouldn't take interviews / recruit "for the reps"
What do you think?
Personally I find refining my prep spending more hours to thoughtfully prepare is way more useful than taking an interview underprepared.
pro: get data on real questions (you can get this anyway)
con: kill your confidence if you’re underprepared and don’t perform well
It’s definitely worth taking a not-as-exciting-opportunity interview as prep in advance of a (or ideally several) top-choice process. Very helpful to have a dry run on your story, suss out common questions on (/ reacting to) your background, etc. PE interviews are ultimately very formulaic, and you’ll be way more comfortable after a few, even if the technicals don’t overlap (and a lot of time they do).
The above doesn’t apply for on-cycle, obviously, since an earlier process may physically prevent you from participating in another.
Labore nihil alias nihil saepe aliquid qui fugit. Sint nisi consectetur et quae. Necessitatibus qui et autem ad ratione perferendis dolorem. Sunt minus rerum repellendus qui aliquid rerum ut. In aliquam vitae quis et. Et ratione iure et sed asperiores est magnam.
Quam nulla ab ut culpa expedita. Cumque et qui laboriosam tenetur deleniti. Dolorem quod et et beatae cumque vel hic. Itaque cumque aliquam voluptatum cum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...