Re:Technical interview performance is kind of arbitrary
by angelbob on Sunday February 21, 2016 @09:43PM
(#11148078)
I've hired, at several places, more than a few people who were fooling me with their sales skills. More often I work at a place where we do multiple interviews -- some "technical" in the sense that it's talking about tech, and some "technical" in the specific sense of asking a programming question with a verifiable answer (i.e. run the program, see if it works.)
Frequently people do well on the technical-not-actually-coding portions and very badly on the please-write-code portions. That is, if we didn't ask the specific coding questions, we'd be hiring people they disqualify.
At those places we less frequently hire people that just can't code -- though I've been around for that too, usually when we look at a resume and say, "oh, we don't need a coding test for him, he's been writing important code for years in a way where he couldn't hide lack of ability."
It would appear that a resume is a poor way to verify that.
On the other hand if you mean that you've discovered during your interviews that candidates more often that we'd think had been trying to fool you -- and that's why you didn't hire them -- well then that doesn't sound much different from the above person's eight years of experience.
I don't think anyone here would argue that there isn't a significant number of candidates for technical positions who BS about their technical skills.