Let's Stop Asking "Why Do You Want to Work for Us?" In Interviews

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Hiring managers and candidates clash over the value of the classic interview question, “Why do you want to work for us?” Critics say it’s a clichéd prompt that ignores economic reality, pressures people to lie about money being their primary motive, and unfairly penalizes those mass-applying in a weak job market or who struggle with unwritten social expectations. Defenders argue it usefully reveals preparation, communication skills, cultural fit, and genuine interest in a company or domain, even if everyone understands that pay is a baseline reason for seeking any job.

Purpose of the Question

  • Many commenters say “Why do you want to work for us?” is shorthand for:
    • “Why us and not others?” when candidates have options.
    • Probing career goals, motivations, cultural fit, and likelihood of staying.
    • Testing whether the candidate did basic research and is prepared.
    • A proxy for “are you promotable” or intrinsically motivated, not just paycheck-driven.

Critiques and Cynicism

  • Others call it clichéd, performative, and often disconnected from reality:
    • In weak job markets or low-level roles, the honest answer is “I need money and you replied.”
    • The question is seen as insulting or illogical when candidates have mass-applied to dozens of roles.
    • It encourages rehearsed YouTube-style answers and rewards bullshitters over straightforward people.
    • Some view it as screening for willingness to conform and flatter management more than for competence.

Money vs Other Motivations

  • One camp: money is the dominant driver; everything else is secondary or unknowable until you’re inside.
  • Another camp: money is assumed; the differentiators are tech stack, work-life balance, commute, stability, culture, ethics, equity, and domain interest.
  • Some mention explicitly rejecting well-paying roles in domains they find objectionable or boring.

Passion, Domain Interest, and Gatekeeping

  • Examples like ESPN: strong domain passion (sports, gaming, outdoors) can clearly improve product quality.
  • Critics warn:
    • Over-indexing on “passion” can shrink the candidate pool, harm diversity, and enable underpay/overwork (“do what you love” industries).
    • Domain knowledge is distinct from being a company “fan”; good engineers can learn the business.

Soft Skills, Social Context, and Ableism Concerns

  • Supporters see the question as a soft-skills test: can the candidate answer honestly yet diplomatically, infer the implicit “besides money,” and engage in a thoughtful conversation.
  • Critics note this disadvantages very literal or neurodivergent candidates, and effectively tests comfort with small talk and mild deception.

Alternatives and Better Framing

  • Suggested improvements:
    • Make the subtext explicit: “Aside from money, what attracts you to this role/company?”
    • Ask about preferred working style, what they look for in a team, or what about the domain interests them.
    • Start with “Here’s how we work; how does that align with what you want?” to make it more two-sided.