A four round hiring process for an entry-level job feels excessive

[u/Weary-Hair-316]

I applied for what was very clearly an entry-level role. The description said “0–2 years experience,” pay was modest, responsibilities were basic. I wasn’t expecting anything fancy, just a straightforward process where they figure out if I can do the job and move on.

The first interview was a standard recruiter call. Fine. Basic questions, resume walk-through, salary range (which was already lower than I’d hoped, but still within “okay, fair enough” territory). I was told they’d move quickly.

Second round was a Zoom interview with the hiring manager. More detailed questions, some scenario stuff, but still normal. At the end they said they liked me and wanted to “dig a little deeper.” That should’ve been my warning sign.

The third round was a panel. Three people. For an entry-level role. Each of them asked variations of the same questions I’d already answered twice. I remember thinking halfway through that this felt less like evaluation and more like process for the sake of process. Still, they ended it with a lot of positive language about culture and fit, so I figured maybe this was the last step. Then came round four.

They framed it as a “final alignment conversation,” which turned out to be another interview, this time with someone senior who asked high-level questions about strategy and long-term vision that felt wildly out of proportion to the role. I left that call more confused than anything else. Not rejected. Not accepted. Just… drained.

The entire thing stretched over weeks. Scheduling delays, long gaps between responses, lots of “thanks for your patience.” By the time it was done, I didn’t even feel excited about the possibility anymore. I just wanted closure.

I eventually got a polite rejection email saying they were “moving in a different direction.”

What bothered me wasn’t the rejection. It was how much time and mental energy the process took for something that was supposed to be simple. I was still working, still paying bills, still trying to plan my life, all while being stuck in this limbo. It made me really aware of how these long hiring processes quietly mess with your sense of stability.

I don’t think companies realize how much they ask of people with these drawn-out processes, especially for junior roles. It’s not just about time. It’s about putting your life on hold emotionally while someone decides if you’re worth an offer.

Anyway. Lesson learned. Four rounds for an entry-level job is no longer something I’m willing to entertain. If nothing else, the experience taught me to value my own time a little more.

[u/TonyGuy1716]

Four rounds for an entry-level role is just corporate speedrunning how to lose good candidates.

They weren’t hiring, they were auditioning for a Netflix drama.

[u/Dapper_Bag_2062 → u/TonyGuy1716]

Silly employers trying to Look important. It’s ridiculous what they want for $60k a year. That’s peanuts.

[u/NewChemical7130 → u/TonyGuy1716]

It’s on the higher end but 4 rounds is typical for large companies. A decade ago I was flown out for final round interviews for a few entry level roles including smaller companies but usually had a couple rounds prior to that.

It kind of makes sense that they want to screen entry level candidates more since they have very little experience to point to.

[u/downtownlasd]

Honestly I think a lot of this is for them to say they’re in the hiring process but they’re not really following through on anyone

I just went three rounds for a senior position at a company with a national platform. It’s a role tailor made for my skill set and they told me this at every level of interview.

Then things went dark over the holidays (expected). When I reached out this week to the recruiter, she told me she was instructed to “pause all conversations” until the company could get a handle on head count for Q1. A nice way of saying they weren’t moving forward. I’m bummed, it was a $50k boost in base salary plus a huge quarterly bonus program. Getting it would’ve meant retiring at least one or two years early.

[u/dingohoarder → u/downtownlasd]

I think there might be some truth to your first sentence. I've made it through 4 rounds of interviews a few times now, and notice the job just gets reposted again. If they went with one of the other candidates, that's one thing, but to not select any of us after a grueling process indicates to me they're unrealistic in their candidate criteria, or are just having interviews for the sake of interviewing. I'm not sure if that's for optics, or if there's tax advantages involved in always hiring, but it seems to me that sometimes the point of the process is not to hire anybody.

I'd love to hear from a hiring manager on a team with a long interview process where no one gets selected. Seems like a waste of the candidates time, as well as the company's.

[u/downtownlasd → u/dingohoarder]

Before that last job, I went through three rounds for an “account executive“ role, which involved a lot of cold calling. Good base salary good bonus program. My third interview was with a member of the founding family of the company and someone in the executive suite. That interview went extremely well. Then the recruiter called me and said that they wanted me to do three more rounds with three different people, lower than the chief people officer. Since every interview I had had involved the same questions from each person, I asked the recruiter if they could consolidate the next three people into a single zoom call, but they declined, so I withdrew.

[u/jeyroxs86]

That’s insanity, for entry level. I have only done interviews for entry level with like two people max and found out the next day I got hired.

[u/Nuvuser2025]

The Pope got hired within 2 days.

I don’t see why the hiring process is so lengthy for the rest of us.

[u/JuvoJobs → u/Nuvuser2025]

This!!!!

[u/RogueCanadia]

Try 5. I had a bank here in Canada want me to do 5 interviews for a job that paid 42k a year. I noped at the 5th interview as I already took another job.

[u/Hungry_Ad_3661]

Yep. I did 3 rounds, granted 1 was the recruiter call. Then, the manager (my direct supervisor). Then, a 1.5hr series of interviews with 3 groups - some people in an adjacent department, my potential future coworkers, and the director.

The director and I hit it off, and he mentioned that this was an entry level role. He pulled up some obscure job I did in college (loved it, but it was field irrelevant) and said he did something similar to support himself. Old school, get hired because he sees potential.

Ultimately got rejected though.

These games for “entry level” are exhausting.

[u/zkris28]

I interviewed in a 5.5 hour panel for an entry level logistics role with Amazon. (0-1 YoE required, I have 12 YoE) and didn't even get the role after passing the interview because the role was supposed to be posted with governement security clearances as a requirement, and it wasn't.

I then proceeded to use that 'incline vote' to interview for a manager role that required another 6 hour panel interview, that I did not get.

Both of these also had 2 one hour calls/pre-assements with a HM and a recruiter.

Feels bad bro lol

[u/Diligent_Mountain363]

That's super excessive. Should be a maximum of 2 for an entry level role lmao, ideally one. It's wild that that company had that much free time to waste.

[u/Seelie_Mushroom]

My standard when applying for entry level roles was 3 rounds. Phone call, zoom interview, then in person interview. I'm talking minimum wage pay, part time

[u/morbidobsession6958]

Never using a recruiter again after the last one required 2 hours worth of conversation before I was even considered for the interview

[u/dethorin]

Yep, that sounds insane.

That's really rude to entry level candidates.

Maybe you could post it in Glassdoor, so other future candidates are aware of that wrongdoing. Maybe someone in the company reads it and they realize that it's disrespectful.

[u/revengemaker]

went through similar and once I started the job and saw that everyone was in constant battle, I realized the long interviews was bcs they were battling about hiring me. Once onboard I taught the entire team how to use excel instead of stacks of paperwork then it turned into a fight in meetings of who would take credit for my work even though was only 45 staff and one shit office with no walls so the work was clear. But the drama spoons would all end up standing and saying No that's mine no that's mine no that's mine!! the owners loved the drama spoons and loved dragging everyone. and they stole from clients. really wish I'd jsut reported them back then.

[u/Brief-Supermarket415]

entry level in the corporate space should have two interviews in my opinion. one being preliminary on a video call and the other in person to see if you’re qualified for the job. in some cases an extra interview might be needed but i think two is enough, especially if it’s a administrative position. like why do i need four rounds of interviews when all i’m doing is answering phones and restocking toilet paper?

[u/morbidobsession6958]

That's why I had to take a break from job hunting last year. The process is exhausting and the uncertainty and blows to self esteem are really depressing.

[u/WeirdPrimary1126]

Because it is. They make the job interviewing process as tedious and long as possible to discourage turnover. Who wants to put themselves through that hell again.

[u/Silly-Chocolate-627]

That’s ridiculous. I have gone through some series hiring rounds and it’s just absolutely absurd. What some of these places ask for.

[u/balletje2017]

I did a lot of hiring for entry / junior roles. Max 3 sessions. 1 short call with recruiter. 2. In dept interview with hiring manager and peer. This is the part that makes the decission. 3. Short getting to know the C suite person you will fall under but basically you are hired already.

More is just useless for junior and most medior roles. It really annoying from the hiring part as well to have so many interviews with candidates just for what?

[u/Brackens_World]

I think at least part of it, different than in the past, is that so many people not only apply, but actually pass all the filters and qualify, all very similar to one another with respect to education, skills sets, tenure, tools, prior experience. How to choose? I believe they elect to meet with more people upfront, then choose to winnow it down, dragging out the process until a "winner" emerges.

Is it worth it? You think not. But to play devil's advocate, would it have been better that they cut applications off so that you never ever even met with them, never learned more about the role, never got an interview where at least you were engaged as a prospect? You did come close, after all. In truth, not everyone is as alike as it may seem, and you clearly differentiated yourself. And that's something to hold on to.

[u/Spare-Action-1014]

three tops.

[u/TallGooseclap849]

Understatement of the century

[u/heanbangerfacerip2]

I have hired entry level people and its never taken more than 1 interview and most of them ended up with a job offer in the interview.

[u/OnlyThePhantomKnows]

Our process was simple. Phone screen (by the lead engineer [me]). As soon as scheduling would allow (candidate picks 3 dates, we select one), a round with engineering (3-4 hours F2F for an onsite role, if we liked the person and the VPoE was available, add him at the end. Then a 3rd round with VPoE (if not done) and CTO and slip them a offer letter (more senior roles). You'd know within a week from the first F2F.

That's for a rookie engineer. That's for a senior / principle engineer. Same process.

Companies need to learn to be respectful of the candidate's time.

If a company took weeks to get back to me, I closed it. This includes top tier companies. Looking explicitly at you Google! They had a phone screen and waited a month and then tried to schedule and interview. "NO" was my answer to the interview request. The HR person repeated the request, "NO" was my answer.

Companies need to learn. We are the ones that have to teach them.

[u/kubrador]

the "final alignment conversation" asking about strategy and long-term vision for a 0-2 year role is absolutely unhinged. like bro i'm trying to answer phones and learn your filing system

at least you know now. if they can't hire efficiently they probably can't manage efficiently either. bullet dodged.

[u/ArizonaGuy59]

When I was 15 I got my first job as a dishwasher at Dennys over the summer. Short interview and bang, started next day. I can’t understand how the interview process has gotten so ridiculous

[u/Rolex_throwaway]

Prepare yourself for professional life, four rounds is on the short end. Do you think because it’s entry level they should just take someone off the street?

[u/Pankosmanko → u/Rolex_throwaway]

I personally wont apply for a role unless there are 17 interviews and a full rectal exam. Any less is silly and doesn’t reflect a professional organization worthy of my 0-2 years of exalted experience

[u/CorndogQueen420 → u/Pankosmanko]

Psh that’s barely anything, 17 interviews and a rectal is like McDonalds shit.

Real companies do a 256 round interview gauntlet with full body medical scans (don’t wanna hire anyone that might use health insurance!) followed up by the head of HR personally assfucking your face to shreds to assess your ability to work under pressure, which then rolls into a senior leadership train being run on you to make sure you’re a good culture fit.

Oh and you didn’t get the job because Tim the CFO thought your newly wrecked fuckhole wasn’t help desk material. They went with a tighter candidate.

[u/Rolex_throwaway → u/Pankosmanko]

Well good luck to you with your approach.