-> Subordinate yourself to the desires of capital in all areas.
-> Suppress the self.
-> Become a true human resource. You are seeking to sell a large chunk of your life, and the buyers don't want scratched or dented goods. Desires of your own are flaws in the product you are selling.
This is, sadly, sound advice, but I think it's important to reflect on what this means about how incidental human flourishing is in our current political economy.
This seems pretty straightforward, but I guess people like OP are exposed to a lot of bad interviewees by nature of their job.
Always be marketing what you can/will/have done for the company to bring value, not what the company can do for you.
I’ve been part of a small number of hiring decisions where relocation was involved. There were a lot of failures exactly like this article talks about: Candidates who will say anything in the interview and even signal that they’ll accept any average salary as long as you’ll take care of their relocation were, in my experience, not interested in doing the work after they got here. Taking the job was a means to an end (getting to their destination) and once they arrived they were either looking for the next job or too busy traveling around their new location to do work.
We tried to mitigate this with clauses requiring them to pay back relocation expenses if they left within N months of arrival, but this didn’t work. They would resign the week after that timer expired or, worse, would start trying to get laid off through poor performance as a way to avoid that clause.
The best fits for relocation were opposite of what I would have thought: The people most hesitant to relocate were the most successful, both at the job and in establishing their new social life outside of work in the new location. They were relocating and taking jobs for the right reasons.
It's like a snotty kid telling a grown adult to go, f themselves because they think that's funny.
A lot of applicants do it. The skill of interviewing is to get a sense of what the true situation is underneath what the candidate is saying with their words. These candidates who show up and do the “subordinate yourself to the desires of capital in all areas” schtick are plentiful. It doesn’t fool an experienced interviewer, so they’re going to be evaluating whether or not you can do the job without becoming a problem based on whatever other signals they can get. The candidate’s words are almost a no-op, other than a slight signal that they have a tendency to blow smoke instead of having real conversations.
tons of americans trying to get to europe
its pretty common if you head to places like reddit's r/cscareerquestions or r/itcareerquestions. lots of idealism and naiveté
I worked in multiple companies in my multi-decade career, including FAANG (or whatever acronym is used now). I was even an intervewer for one of those
The people that give the sanitized calculated responses are actually what employers are typically looking for. It shows the candidate is willing to do the job without causing problems by confirming as a good worker bee.
Your workplace is not somewhere for real conversations.
Most people want to have a job set up before they move to a new city.
Why do you want a job?, Why do you want to relocate?, Why do you want to work here?, etc. are BS "no-op" questions that are not relevant to the skills that they are promoting.
If an interviewer asks these types of questions, they are literally showcasing that this part of the interview is a BS "Subordinate yourself to the desires of capital in all areas" conversation. You will predictably get the "no-op" answers you asked for.
The interviewer always sets the tone of the meeting. You can't complain when they chose to play along. If you want a real conversation, you need to make it amply clear.
> Why do you want a job?, Why do you want to relocate?, Why do you want to work here?,
I never said anything about those questions or even the type of questions. Did you confuse my comment for someone else's?
The no-op answers I was talking about can come from any question, including technical ones. Some candidates will tell talk in circles for 30 minutes about the company's product and how the team did amazing things, but you can't pin them down to explaining what they did or anything that might prove they know what they're talking about.
They will change the subject at every opportunity and talk your ear off with things regurgitated from blogs, but you leave the interview feeling like you wasted 30 minutes because they were so busy dodging every question and combining words together that they thought you would like to hear.
One alternative is to skip the conversational format and go straight into coding and deep technical questions, but hey guess what? There are people who will hate you for doing that too!
I like to be asked this because I can for one tell the truth, and then see how the interviewer responds (when this is at an advanced stage of the process, with real people)
The interview is to determine their skills.
Some candidates will talk about their work history for 30 minutes and you leave the room with no real idea what they did. They tell you they created synergies and did cross-functional coordination with stakeholders in a metrics-driven blah blah blah. You receive no usable information about what they did, what they can do, or how much of the thing they talked about was due to their work. All you know is that they can talk a lot.
If they're applying to a dysfunctional vibes-based workplace then delivering an empty vibes-based interview can work. Smart people actively try to filter themselves out of those companies, not into them.
I'm trying to explain that it's easy to spot the fakers.
When you do a lot of interviews you see a lot of candidates who follow the advice above. Unless it's your first month of doing interviews, it's really easy to see right through.
The candidates never think they're coming off as fake, though.
Really skilled interviewers can bait these candidates into telling little half-truths and inconsistencies that reveal their game.
This is obvious for most people... generally a bad financial idea to move to a new city without a job. But, primarily taking a job just to move to a new city seems odd to me. I guess I just prioritize a job I want to work at over a city I live in.
Why do you want to relocate is one of them.
1) Be truthful, and say the main reason you want the job is the money and the visa. You will be looked over as not having enough passion for the work.
2) Lie completely and say your number one motivation is adtech, something you would prostrate yourself to do in slum conditions if necessary. You will be sussed out as a faker.
3) Come up with some mixture of the two that the company can believe. If you can fool them into thinking you are at least somewhat motivated by the chance to work on their awful product, but also that there is truthfully some other motivation, you come across as a good bet and might not be thrown out of the pipeline.
Most people don't prioritize work over everything else. They move toward the life they want and try to find a job that supports it.
People move to be closer to friends and family or to be in a city they like more.
A lot of applicants requesting relocation were moving because their spouse got a job in the city and they had to move, too.
Meanwhile, if your spouse is moving for a job, it seems bizarre that a response on "why do you want to relocate" wouldn't just be some form of "my spouse got a job here, so I will be living here now".
That's no real passion to work for us buddy, byez.
I want to start with the core idea, because everything in this guide comes back to it:
If relocation is the only reason you want a job abroad, do not expect the company to be excited about hiring you.
That sounds harsh, and I know how it lands, because the desire to move is one of the most genuine and personal things a person can carry. I’ve spent years working with engineers who want to relocate, and I understand this drive.
But during an interview, that same desire can quietly work against you, and I want to make sure that does not happen to you.
This is the kind of impression you should avoid giving to recruiters!
After working so many years with people who want to relocate, I have watched the same thing happen again and again. Which is...
In interviews, candidates focus so hard on the idea of moving that they forget the person across the table is looking for someone who cares about what the company does, what the team is building, and where the product is going.
It is obvious why this happens, and it is honest. Most people answer relocation questions by talking almost exclusively about wanting to move abroad, seeking a better quality of life, higher salaries paid in a hard currency, and getting away from a difficult situation in their home country. Occasionally, there is the extra detail of a neighbor who claimed a Spanish passport and went to live abroad, while you have no second nationality to fall back on. All of that is true, in the sense that, I get it: it’s a massive motivator. Any recruiter who opened a search from Singapore, from the Netherlands, or from the Basque Country in Spain already knows it and already assumes it. So actually, if you think it this way… your wish to relocate is not a surprise to anyone.
Here is the problem. When that is the whole answer, you create the wrong impression of what you want and of whether you will be a good hire. You give the recruiter three quiet worries:
You sound more interested in someone sponsoring your visa and spending money on you than in the company itself.
If a company solves your paperwork, you might be the kind of person who uses that to settle in and then leaves. That is close to the worst message you can send.
You sound like you would accept almost any offer that gets you out, which means you would also leave for the next slightly better one, or quit the day you decide the new country does not have enough sunny days.
Recruiters buy security. I have said this across my articles, and it stays true. They want to know the hire will perform, will do good work, will stay, and will settle into the company. When you tell a long life story about why you have to leave, two things go wrong at once. First, you sound exactly like the candidate before you and the one after you. Second, you are not telling the buyer what they came to buy.
Think of it as a meeting between a buyer and a seller. You are selling your services, and you cannot sell the buyer something they did not ask for. Your buyer knows precisely what they want. This is the opposite of a cold sales call. They posted a job ad, and your job is to rise to it and answer it. Relocation can be your engine, and it probably is the deepest and most genuine reason you are sitting there, prepared and full of enthusiasm. Keep it. It just cannot be your only visible motivation.
Companies want motivated, engaged people who are genuinely glad to join their team.
So when the conversation turns to motivation, set aside the picture of U-Bahn rides, a quick train to Munich, or a rental car down the Autobahn with no speed limit through the Black Forest. Step onto something more tangible: the work itself.
These are the points worth preparing months before the interview, and I do not exaggerate when I say months. In my recent piece on how to write a cover letter that works, I showed a letter where six months passed between the letter and the interview, and the research in it still paid off. That same research feeds your interview answers.
Here is what to bring instead:
Interest in the product. Research it and look at the latest news. When I wrote the profile of Picnic in the Netherlands, you could feel how much the team cared about their product. Any candidate who pays attention to that walks in with half a foot inside the door, simply because they noticed how much the company loves building what it builds.
Interest in the mission, with explicit lines. Something like “Your mission speaks to me because it ties into sustainability, which I have been working on for years. In fact, here is a hobby project I put on GitHub that cuts the amount of compute required for planning delivery routes for groceries and also helps lower the carbon footprint since it can propose smarter routes.” That single move plugs your engineering skill straight into their mission.
Excitement about the technology and the industry. Look into the ecosystem the company sits in. If it is part of the Amsterdam ecosystem, ask yourself what sets it apart and say so.
Room to grow. You can say you checked LinkedIn and saw people moving toward promotion with an interesting cadence, maybe a horizontal or vertical step roughly every year and a half. This matters to you because you have both the attitude and the aptitude to grow.
The chance to make an impact. You can say your motivation is a platform where you can make a strong impact, something you cannot do today from your home country, and that with this team in this market you know you will. The impact might even reach back to your home country.
Why this company stands out, and how the role fits. You can tell them you understand they opened this role because it matches their long-term ideas, and then show how you match too.
Let’s look at a small screen capture of a cover letter an engineer sent to a company he was applying for. Even if it’s a cover letter and not an interview transcript, the principles apply:
This excerpt shows how a candidate made research about the company and their stack, which the company, in turn, found appealing. Details like this make your message sound memorable. You can use this same approach during interviews.
And yes, you can absolutely make it clear that relocation matters to you. The reverse mistake exists. You would rather not come off as if you wandered into the interview accidentally and had no idea the role was built for someone who needs to move. So acknowledge the recruiter’s narrative and join it honestly. Relocation can be part of the answer. It just should not be the whole answer.
Let me make this concrete with the exact question and two very different replies.
“Why do you want to relocate?”
❌ Weak answer:
Honestly, the salaries in Germany are a huge reason I want to relocate. They’re so much higher than what I can earn here.
Or, alternatively:
I’ve always wanted to live in the Netherlands. The quality of life, work-life balance, and overall stability are very appealing to me, and I'd love the opportunity to build my future there.
Well, both answers miss the point.
Look at the first one. It tells the recruiter that salary is your primary motivation. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to earn more. We all work for money. But if compensation is the main reason you’re applying, how is a recruiter supposed to feel confident that you’ll stay instead of leaving as soon as another company offers you an extra €2,000 a year?
The second answer sounds much better, but it has a different problem. It tells the recruiter why you like the country, not why you want this job. You could give the exact same answer to a hundred different employers. Nothing about it explains why you’re excited about the company, the team, or the work itself.
✅ Strong answer:
For the strong answer, I’ll use a real company:
Relocating has been a goal of mine for a long time, and the Netherlands is a market I've been interested in. But working at Picnic is my main motivation for speaking with you today.
I’ve spent time learning about what you're building, and what really stands out to me is that you’re solving real-world problems by making grocery shopping more efficient and sustainable. And you’re doing it at scale, which means you’re making a difference in millions of people's everyday lives.
I enjoy working on products where engineering directly shapes the customer experience, and that’s exactly what I see at Picnic. I want to contribute to a product people use every day and help solve problems that matter.
Look at what that answer does. It acknowledges that you want to relocate, but it quickly shifts the focus to why you want to do it with this company. It shows that you’ve taken the time to understand what they’re building and why it excites you.
Instead of remembering you as someone who wants to leave their country, the recruiter will remember you as someone excited about the opportunity at their company.
Now that you have those two real examples, a favor. Please do not copy what I just said and read it aloud in the interview! Prepare your own version, seriously. I am terrified that you will read it out loud and the next candidate who found this same resource will read it too, and you will both get sent to the “Unfortunately,” email listing. Use it as a frame for your thinking, because what I am really doing here is showing you a common, almost subconscious trap and how to step around it.
Everything below lines up with what I keep saying across The Global Move:
Research the company before the interview. Finding a job that relocates you is not easy, but if you know where to look, you can find one. Treat that hard-won first conversation with respect.
Prepare two or three company-specific reasons you want to join. Tie them to the product, to the company’s direction, and to the HR marketing content they publish. Many companies pour real effort into content meant to attract candidates, and you can use it in your favor.
Use fresh material. Do not lean on old content, because a company’s direction changes.
Mention relocation, and stop there. It is a key, genuine part of your motivation, and there is real romance in the beautiful, passionate reasons that make us move abroad. Just keep it as one note in the answer and put most of your energy into your enthusiasm for the work itself.
Also, look after a more diverse scope than one city. Some companies run relocation programs in more than one country. Catawiki, for example, is based in the Netherlands and recently opened a relocation path to Portugal, the same route Peter took when he moved from Nigeria. If you fixate on a single country and there is no opening there, you close the door on yourself.
All of this reinforces something I keep coming back to. There are no shortcuts in 2026 for landing a job with relocation. I would love to tell you otherwise, and I do not see it getting easier soon. But I do see the opportunities, I see people who get there, and I see people who prepare for months and make it worth it. So if you have to stand out, let this help you stand out.
And do not let a first rejection knock you down. Just do not treat that first interview as a throwaway learning experience, either. It is a learning experience you have to be extremely well prepared for, because that first conversation is so hard to get. In a previous entry, I shared the numbers from PostHog: around nine hundred applications for a single role, with only a small fraction, 55 out of 900, reaching the later interview stages. Do not waste the chance.
I cover the broader picture in my pieces on how the tech job search with relocation looks in 2026 and how to prepare months before you apply, and the LinkedIn groundwork that gets your name known before you ever submit a resume. Keep an eye on the jobs and be very deliberate before you send out applications. The spray and pray system will not work, so don’t take up your time with it!
Thanks so much for reading, and I hope this helps you. I would love to hear in the comments if you have been in a similar spot and found something that worked.
I publish relocation-friendly tech roles every week at The Global Move. If you are getting ready for your move, subscribe and start building your runway now.
No posts