Say there are 20 people being interviewed, would you rather go first, last or somewhere in the middle?

_________________

Probably last. First has to be the worst, since you can easily be forgotten. The middle might be OK, if you can stand out.

There may be a small advantage to going last only if they are deciding right afterwards. Otherwise, they all kind of run together and seem the same and they'll just rely on whatever notes they said so no real advantage.

Going first could be good, because you get them when they are in a better mood.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I'm actually aware of the research on this:
If the decision on the hire is being made right away...you want to go last.
If there is going to be a delay after the last interview before the decision is made, you want to go first.
You NEVER want to go in the middle.

_________________

I would ask my Facebook friends and see what they say?

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

I would say last. However, I have been hired twice after being the first person interviewed. And, the last guy that I hired was the first person that I interviewed, & after interviewing 5 additional candidates, I ended up hiring the first guy.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan

If there are 20, I would want to go last. However, if there are only a handful of candidates, I would want to go first.

just heard on the radio yesterday that going last for an interview is the most effective...56% chance you get the job

_________________