Has the Peer Interview Quietly Become a Fourth Formal Interview in Revenue Teams?

·Aug 01, 2026 03:44 PM·

Anyone else feel like the peer interview has quietly turned into a fourth interview? It used to be the one call where you got a real read on the team, the manager, and whether the day to day actually matched the pitch. Lately peers are running the same competency questions as the recruiter and hiring manager, and pushing back on past wins and exits the same way a hiring manager would. 25 minutes intro, their questions, 5 minutes left for me to ask anything. Curious if this is a trend across revenue orgs right now or if I'm just catching a rough stretch.

💙2

❤️1

4 comments

· Sorted by Oldest

Brice E.
·
·
I think it's becoming more common, especially as companies try to reduce hiring mistakes. My guess is that peer interviews are no longer just about culture fit—they're also being used to validate whether a candidate can actually work with the team day to day. That said, if the conversation turns into a repeat of the recruiter and hiring manager interviews, it loses one of its biggest values. As a candidate, I'd rather use that time to understand how the team really works, the challenges they face, and whether it's actually a place I'd want to join.
Kasey G.
·
·
Thanks, Brice E. ~ I wondered about shorter and less experienced staffs coupled with more use of HR platforms used to score interviewees. Maybe it also has to do with how so many people are using AI to match their resume to the job postings. It used to only take a resume and a screener call to determine if someone was truly qualified, but I'm guessing that barrier is higher/more challenging now.
Daniel S.
·
·
I think you both have nailed it above, the cost of bringing in a bad hire is catastrophic, especially in SaaS, so more eyes on a candidate brings in more chances to avoid that mistake. I think also because both candidates/interviewers are becoming more reliant on AI than ever its just destroying the quality of both candidates & job listings. Ive had candidates use LLMs in real-time, during an interview, to read answers to my questions. Its a weird time in hiring.
🙌1
Girija S.
·
·
As a Recruiter, I feel it's because of multiple factors and not one:-
Some companies don't have structured scorecard hiring- anyone starts to question anything? No rubrics/or training for the hiring team. To me this isn't a right investment of time..
In small companies every bad hire matters, so in order to be meticulous, no one likes to own the "Yes" for that particular candidate. What if the candidate fails?, whom to blame? So, let's have one more person validate.
Competition is stiff, earlier I had 100 CVs for one role, now 3X- so interviews are jumbled as well.
Personally, I'm a big advocate for letting the candidate have 15 minutes for Questions, as it's a two way street- but many companies still have a long way to go !
🙌1

Brice E.
·
·
I think it's becoming more common, especially as companies try to reduce hiring mistakes. My guess is that peer interviews are no longer just about culture fit—they're also being used to validate whether a candidate can actually work with the team day to day. That said, if the conversation turns into a repeat of the recruiter and hiring manager interviews, it loses one of its biggest values. As a candidate, I'd rather use that time to understand how the team really works, the challenges they face, and whether it's actually a place I'd want to join.
Kasey G.
·
·
Thanks, Brice E. ~ I wondered about shorter and less experienced staffs coupled with more use of HR platforms used to score interviewees. Maybe it also has to do with how so many people are using AI to match their resume to the job postings. It used to only take a resume and a screener call to determine if someone was truly qualified, but I'm guessing that barrier is higher/more challenging now.
Daniel S.
·
·
I think you both have nailed it above, the cost of bringing in a bad hire is catastrophic, especially in SaaS, so more eyes on a candidate brings in more chances to avoid that mistake. I think also because both candidates/interviewers are becoming more reliant on AI than ever its just destroying the quality of both candidates & job listings. Ive had candidates use LLMs in real-time, during an interview, to read answers to my questions. Its a weird time in hiring.
🙌1
Girija S.
·
·
As a Recruiter, I feel it's because of multiple factors and not one:-
Some companies don't have structured scorecard hiring- anyone starts to question anything? No rubrics/or training for the hiring team. To me this isn't a right investment of time..
In small companies every bad hire matters, so in order to be meticulous, no one likes to own the "Yes" for that particular candidate. What if the candidate fails?, whom to blame? So, let's have one more person validate.
Competition is stiff, earlier I had 100 CVs for one role, now 3X- so interviews are jumbled as well.
Personally, I'm a big advocate for letting the candidate have 15 minutes for Questions, as it's a two way street- but many companies still have a long way to go !
🙌1