I got my last job with 5 h. And honestly, I’d rather do 7 h as an interview than 20 h over 2 w for $200/hr. I’m just thinking about this and the thought just makes me feel so bleh.
I think it’s the liability it incurs. A two week commitment. I just can’t see doing it for $4k. It’s just not worth it.
It’s like 4 calls for 4 hours on a consulting platform. Instead of 4 h I have to spend 20 h and spread over 2 w. This kills me.
> I think it’s the liability it incurs. A two week commitment. I just can’t see doing it for $4k. It’s just not worth it.
In my opinion it's the opposite of a liability. You're getting practical experience to know what it'll be like to work at that place. More hours ends up being better because each hour you put in gives you more information. It's an opportunity to see how things are run, get to know the team (if you pair'd with a few different people), get a feel for what you'll be doing, etc..
If you're worried about a 2 week commitment how are you not worried about general W2 employment where it's expected you'll be committing 40 hours a week until you either retire or die? The same applies for most 1099 contracts too where chances are you'll be putting in multiple weeks or months to complete a task.
You'd be able to exit the process if it's not a good fit using this method too. Perhaps even during an initial call before there's any type of contract mentioned.
Going for interviews while you're currently employed is also in addition to your job. It's just you're doing "real world" things in the contract based interview instead of answering technical questions or whiteboarding implementations.
The alternative is spending 7-12 hours doing 5-7 technical interviews for $0.