Insight Editorial TeamDisclaimer: The content on this website is strictly the property of Insight, IIT Bombay. Content here cannot be reproduced, quoted or taken out of context without written permission from Insight. If you wish to reproduce any content herein, please contact us:
Chief Editors: Adarsh Prajapati (adarsh.p@iitb.ac.in), Shivam Agarwal (22b2720@iitb.ac.in)
Mail to: insight@iitb.ac.in
Disclaimer: This article primarily contains information gathered from the interviews with candidates from the 2023-24 (20 interviewees) and 2024-25 (10 interviewees) placement seasons, including a survey (374 respondentsInsight would like to clarify that although 68 of the 69 PPO holders from the cohort of 374 did not sit for the placement season, 52 of them acted as runners. In the survey, runners were directed to a dedicated section where questions they were ineligible to answer were excluded, ensuring that responses reflected only their actual experience related to the on-ground proceedings of placements.) for the latter. 5 Insight Editorial Board Members, who were present as runners in the 2025-26 season have also corroborated certain observartions. After the release of the first part, Insight also got in conversation with 4 PT Cell members (2 ICs and 2 APCs) who were willing to talk to the panel, as well as 4 alumni (graduated in 2024) who had come for recruiting in the 2025-26 season.
This article is the second in our three-part series on the placement process (read the first part here). It elaborates on the proceedings during the placement season, providing an overview of placement logistics, infrastructure, and communication channels within the PT Cell as interviews begin.
Site Management
The placement season enters its most active phase with the commencement of interviews in early December, which currently take place in hostel 16. The first phase of interviews begins on Day 1 Refer to Part 1 for more details. Caveat: PSUs are allowed to recruit before Day 1 , but the number of selections are few. , scheduled for December 1st, with interviews starting at 7:00 AM for companies in the first slot (1.1). The interviews continue until 3 PM, and the second slot (1.2) begins at 5 PM, with the official end time as 1 AM. This schedule is followed for days 1 to 4.
Given the huge number of participants in the placement process, hostel 16 faces issues in catering to the large volume of students. This problem is not due to an inherent lack of space in hostel 16, but rather because of the bottleneck created at the entrance to a wing.
The survey Refer to Part 1 for more details about the survey cohort distribution. responses highlight pitfalls in site management. Moreover, all 10 of the 2023-24 interviews and 13 of the 25 2024-25 interviews also mention the absence of decorum outside interview rooms on the earlier days (1-3), as well as continuous disturbances and interruptions in the lobby. They highlight that these annoyances cause disruptions in virtual interviews, affecting communication with the interviewer.
What is your view on the crowding in the wings and corridors?
Among the pressing problems highlighted by all 10 interviewees from the 2023-24 season was the lack of access to basic necessities, such as potable water, coolers, and washroom facilities.
Insight noted the persistence of these problems in the 2024-25 placement season, where the survey results indicate that 73% of the 306 respondents either did not find the provision of water coolers to be adequate or that they were too far apart to use. In hostel 16, one water cooler is stationed between the three wings on each floor, catering to the staggered use of 36 students in the semester. On similar lines, problems were also highlighted with respect to the provision of washrooms, as shown in the survey results below:
Did you find the provision of washrooms to be adequate?
Beyond inconvenience for the stakeholders, such problems also leave a negative impression of IITB on company representatives.
A related issue here has been the lack of proper internet in hostel 16. Hostel 16 has blind spots in the internet where mobile coverage is absent. Responses from 7 of the 10 interviewees for the placement season 2023-24 mentioned this, creating technical hiccups during virtual interviews that caused delays in further rounds. Delays in the interview process can impact the final selections. This has been explained below.
By the time the placement season 2024-25 was underway, hostel 16’s infrastructure (along with that of other hostels) had been upgraded by the institute, and the IITB wireless network had been installed. The survey results indicate a movement towards resolving this problem, but there remains ground to be covered.
How was the network connectivity during online interviews/contacting runners?
The PiC responded to these issues by saying
“We are moving towards improving these things – for example, Wi-Fi is fixed, to resolve the issue of overcrowding, we are working very closely with the Estate Office and ensuring better cleanliness of toilets. Right now, we can’t think of an alternative to hostel 16 – that itself takes effort. Unlike H16, the first-year students have left, and the place is empty, which is not the case with other hostels.”
The presence of non-registered runners Runners refer to people accompanying the candidates on the days of interviews to help them out with interview logistics and often emotional support. (both students and alumni) during the interviews amplifies the issue of overcrowding. Students often bring multiple runners (sometimes more than permitted) to keep track of different company schedules and make sure their candidates secure timely interviews. This can often lead to numerous problems, such as candidates finding it difficult to reach the interview room, especially when walk-ins A walk-in refers to the process in which the company opens interviews to all candidates beyond the shortlist and waitlist. start.
If the space was overcrowded, what was the reason?
The PiC mentioned that the PT cell is planning a mechanism where only registered runners who are students will be allowed to enter H16 against a barcode. In Insight’s opinion, however, the enforceability of this mechanism will always be under question, given the sheer number of people involved who need to be identified in a very short amount of time.
The PiCs noted that in certain instances, the companies provide a very small window of communication for walk-ins, which leads to difficulties in controlling the entire exercise from their end.
The malfunctioning of interview scheduling software Platform where the interview schedule of the candidate can be seen based on the preference of the students for different companies. (which is used only for the first few days) often compounds many of the aforementioned problems. The survey reflected a negative view of the software, with 213 of the 306 respondents highlighting issues with interview schedules not being posted in a timely manner and the software hanging frequently.
Did you face issues with the interview scheduling software, on the day of your interview? If yes, tick on the relevant boxes.
The PiC acknowledged these problems in the interview with Insight and mentioned,
“The scheduling software has had issues; we are looking into how quickly we can fix it or look for an alternative. We tried looking at the data, where there was crowding, etc. We had a co-PiC appointed for these reasons. There is an implementation issue.”
Insight has been apprised by 7 interviewees that the software’s performance was slightly better in the latest season compared to 2023-24. However, the survey results point towards a bigger problem: companies not following the schedules posted on the software. Of the 206 respondents, 146 claimed that most companies did not follow the interview schedules on the software.
An analysis of survey results indicates that the trend (of not following the schedule) was consistent across various days. This is contrary to the impression held by all our interviewees that the firms not following interview slotting are primarily Day 1 and 2 firms (more on that later).
Delays and Lapses in Communication
The previous placement seasons saw students reporting various instances of gaps in communication by both the PT cell and the recruiting companies. In the survey, 178 out of 294 respondents reported delays in receiving information about further rounds by at least one of the companies. These delays often stretch into hours, with no notice being provided to the candidates. One particular interviewee from the placement season 2023-24 recalled their experience of waiting for an interview update till 2 AM, and had to report at 8 AM the following morning, though no official slot extends till 2 AM. Cascading of similar cases adds to the anxiety and exhaustion of students, which can impact their performance.
A prominent example of a similar problem in the 2024-25 season can be found in a Day 1.2 consulting firm (same one mentioned above). Four interviewees mentioned that the interview scheduling for this firm was extremely chaotic and ran till after 1 AM. Interviewees recall sitting outside in the wings for hours. An ex-internship coordinator, who was the handler for this particular firm in the previous season, and a runner for a candidate in 2024-25, mentions that these issues are expected with this company every year.
One interviewee went on to add,
“Day 3-7 – interviews are delayed by hours, companies are sitting on candidates doing nothing, and HR disappears for hours. Then, they demand further rounds at 11 PM/midnight. Why is that so, and why do they get away with it?”
3 interviewees from the 2023-24 season, as well as 13 from 2024-25, claim that while such delays are uncommon occurrences in the early days, they were more observable in the later days of the season.
How was your experience with regards to the following aspects of company interactions?
Insight did not find any statistical evidence to support the above claim of interviews on later days being generally more chaotic than the earlier days.
An interviewee in the 2023-24 season, who had given interviews from Day 1 to Day 6, believes that these problems are primarily due to the companies’ end.
“A big reason for these problems is less professionalism shown by these particular company HRs and lower incentives to conduct the process promptly, as opposed to earlier firms.”
Beyond delays in the interviews and selection intimations, a few peculiar cases of miscommunication regarding selections have also been observed (Insight details 3 such cases in Part 3). An example is shared by an interviewee from placement season 2023-24:
“After my interview on day 4, I received a soft confirmation [regarding selections] from the company, and had not been rejected yet. My name showed up in the interim selections; however, the post was deleted within a few minutes owing to the miscommunication. After 9 days of no shortlists, finally, on Day 13, the same company released extended selections with my name.”
While it is possible to miss adding people to a list due to human error, it is unclear how people would get added to a shortlist by mistake.
A similar case occurred during the placement season 2024-25, where there was a delay in communicating the candidate’s selection, resulting in them having to sit for further interviews with other companies. The day they were placed, they also received an offer from the previous company, but the result was not communicated by the PT Cell on time.
The PiCs conveyed that this process is one-on-one, communications take up time, and the PT Cell tries to push the companies to make decisions about further rounds on time. Although there are delays from the company’s end, as highlighted by the survey, the mechanism by which the PT Cell encourages companies to release their results is not entirely clear.
The PiC replied to these problems, saying that,
“The issue actually is with the filling of choices. There is a majority of students who don’t fill out the choices that they are supposed to ahead of time. Now, the team has to contact each of these students and then ensure that they have filled out their choices. If students were doing this properly, the delay in communication can be significantly minimised.”
Such problems are not just limited to interview days. An interviewee from the 2024-25 season who had initially received an email from the PT cell informing them that they had received a PPO later received another intimation instructing them to ignore the previous email, stating that it was a result of a miscommunication. Similar instances of miscommunication have also been reported by two other interviewees. The situation presented by the above interviewee raises a serious question regarding the procedure of communication relays by the PT cell and the company.
The interview interference
As indicated in Figure 4, the unregulated entry of non-registered runners and alumni leads to overcrowding, one of the more visible symptoms. However, this has historically been the cause of a different set of problems- the interference in recruitment. Of the total of 35 interviews, 23 mentioned that IIT Bombay alumni working at recruiting companies, who, although not part of the interview panels, show up, potentially swaying decisions in favour of specific candidates. The following part of this section is a compilation of examples pertaining to how the interview process deviates from the stipulated procedure in different ways.
Did you ever happen to see/experience interference in the interview/selection process by people who ideally should not be present on the ground?
One of the runners from the 2024-25 season we interviewed shared the following incident, which was confirmed by three other interviewees.
“{The same Day 1.2 consulting firm mentioned above} stopped following the interview scheduling software after a point. In the midst of this, an IB alum appeared on the scene, and all IB candidates secured early interviews and selections.”
Another alum we interviewed had a more serious concern to share,
“In 2021-22, {A Day 1 wealth advisory firm} had selected a candidate who wasn’t even present in the shortlist*, due to the interference of alumni working in the firm. I saw the same person, lobbying for candidates in my placement season [2022-23] as well”
*Insight confirmed this claim via the Placement Blog 2021-22
Ex-PT Cell members have been among the other participants in such interference, as indicated by the survey results in Figure 7. 8 interviewees mentioned that ex-PT Cell members, who are often runners (or at times candidates themselves), influence the company handlers to secure an early interview slot Slotting of candidates becomes a factor determining final selection when rolling offers are made, and the firm does not interview every shortlisted candidate. The ones who are interviewed earlier have a better chance to secure this offer as there is a possibility others may not be interviewed if the candidate satisfies the company criteria. . This reality on the ground presents an inherent conflict of interest which the PT Cell needs to resolve to ensure a more meritocratic process.
While Insight cannot independently verify the internal criteria used by firms, the recurring pattern observed, coupled with the survey responses (see Fig. 8) on candidates not getting interviews despite shortlists, suggests that practical interview volumes for some companies are lower than the nominal shortlist size (which can extend up to 40 as observed on the Placement Blog) in several cases It is purely based on the company to select candidates from the shortlists or go ahead with interviewing candidates in waitlists and walk-ins. This decision depends on the number of expected candidates the company is looking for. . These very well include circumstances wherein candidates were unable to secure an interview at their higher preference firm. As such, having connections (both within the institute’s student bodies and the company) increases one’s chances of securing an interview.
Beyond such explicit interventions, cases of implicit biases also affect the selection procedure. Insight’s observation, corroborated with all 35 interviews as well as the survey results, notes that many firms select candidates prematurely, before interviewing everyone in their waitlist or shortlist. In the case of earlier days, this takes the form of a ‘hotlist’ from within the shortlist, maintained primarily by consulting and quant firms, who seek to secure their favourite candidates before other recruiters can make offers.
The deviation from stipulated schedules may stem from preferences towards certain candidates based on their pre-interview interactions with the candidates (which is also technically not allowed), or the result of lobbying A lot of the interviewing panel consists of IITB alumni, who were students one or two years removed. Hence, they may personally, or through common friends, know certain candidates. for specific candidates by their friends within the firm. We brought up these specific mishaps in the process in earlier days across consult and quant firms in our interview with the PiCs, and this was their response:
“For consult companies, it’s difficult because of their processes. By the very nature of consulting companies, they do not just test; they also want to examine personality and other related issues. In those cases, consult companies will be treated separately. We do distinguish between consult and quant. Both require different kinds of tests for them, and if they violate the rules, then we take action accordingly. But we have been strict about these issues, which the students reported. We can’t have one blanket rule for everyone. Overall, we try to see that within a particular cohort of companies, we are fair to everyone.”
An incident in the survey response from the 2024-25 season:
“[A prominent quant firm] shortlisted me for interviews based on the tests, and then a few days later removed me from the shortlist.”
Insight confirmed from the Placement Blog that this particular company’s updated shortlist had 22 candidates missing from the original shortlist, which was released 7 days earlier.
An incident from our interviews with students who sat in the placement season 2023-24 regarding a Day 3 firm is mentioned below:
“They [the company] released a shortlist on December 1, and on the day of the interview, they released a revised interview shortlist which had none of the original candidates. They then asked the newly shortlisted candidates to come for the interview through the fire exit while blocking entry to the original candidates.”
Another example of a lapse in the waitlists and walk-ins process by the companies (in season 2023-24) was when some students who were otherwise not eligible to sign a company’s JAF Job Announcement Form for a particular company. (in cases where even bonus JAFs were not allowed) ended up getting a chance to interview and had their names in the company’s final selections. Last year’s (2024-25) survey results, however, point to an improvement in the process, which may be attributed to lower rush in the subsequent days The difference in the number of final selections was confirmed by Insight from the placement blog. . It should be noted, however, that 61 of the 289 respondents still mentioned that they did not get an interview despite having a shortlist.
Was there ever a situation where you did not get an interview despite having a shortlist?
The PiC commented on this, saying.
“The complaints we’ve received about certain people getting priority for interviews have been addressed immediately by reprimanding those involved and restricting their participation in placements. However, the number of such complaints has been significantly low.”
(Insight’s view on the lack of official student complaints will be reflected in part 3 of the series)
In line with such incidents, the survey results and interviewee responses have nevertheless raised questions over the transparency in these processes: 175 of 306 respondents on the survey felt that the PT cell was not transparent in terms of the interview slotting of the candidates. It is worth noting that 119 of these 175 respondents had received an offer in the first phase of the season—a strong indication that perceptions of interview slotting discrepancies were shared broadly across the cohort, rather than being outcome-based. As mentioned in Part 1, the PiCs have mentioned that the PT Cell is working on making the slotting parameters available to stakeholders ahead of time.
The PiC responded to this issue, saying that,
“At least what I have seen on the ground is that our ICs and
APCs
APC stands for Associate Placement Coordinators, tasked with managing recruitment execution, coordinating with recruiters, organizing campus visits, assisting in pre- and post-interview activities, supporting student preparatory events, and aiding Placement Managers during the first placement phase.
are trying to convince the companies to take as many students as possible. Someone helping someone else, these are a very small fraction. Because there are many companies coming, the timelines are so short that a lot of things are done verbally in terms of convincing companies. I would note that, and I think asking the students to be more responsible and not trying to leverage contacts in the PT cell is also another way to ensure fairness in the process.”
However, as evident from some of the cases above, Insight believes it is unrealistic to expect all students to act with complete virtue and integrity, especially in high-stakes situations such as placements (more on this in Part 3). This is cognisant of the fact that during placements, individual responsibility is also a lacking feature, as highlighted by the sheer crowd of runners. It is then imperative that the PT Cell works towards minimising such cracks in the process, which undermine the fairness of the process, and does not let particular students leverage the advantage of early intimations.
Two interviewees from season 2023-24 and 3 interviewees from 2024-25 also mentioned that the PT Cell does try to take corrective measures during the interview chaos. An interviewee from the 2023-24 placement season mentioned that the PiCs were present on the ground to ensure order, and this led to their friends securing interviews timely.
While the discrepancies in interview slotting by the PT Cell and selection biases by the companies can be deemed subjective and arbitrary in some instances, there have also been cases of malpractice and policy violations by the mentioned stakeholders. Insight builds upon these in the next and final part of this article, along with a view of what lies ahead in the upcoming placement seasons.
16