News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by joesmo on Thursday October 13, 2016 @01:05PM (#12702265)
Yup, those are SRE questions, but the fact that Google didn't interview him for the position he applied for makes them out to be even bigger idiots than I had them pegged at for using SRE questions on a director role. Regardless, just having such a stupid process exposed reflects badly on Google. In my own experience, Google isn't even able to call at the scheduled time so, while not the worst interviewers ever, they're pretty close and very far down the ladder. Put it another way, I doubt they could convince many to even interview without their extremely hefty compensation packages.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by sfrailsdev on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:06PM (#12702753)
From what I've heard, google intentionally screws with timing, who you will be speaking to, and other factors in order to try to understand how you deal with changes in circumstances.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by Morgawr on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:50PM (#12703096)
This is blatantly false.

Source: I work for Google. Our daily schedule is packed with meetings and we try to be as on time as possible, interviews (which are something that everybody should be doing) work exactly the same, we don't try to screw people over with bad timing just to "test" them. Sometimes it happens that people miss interviews and somebody else has to show up, this is unfortunately a problem and it shouldn't happen but sometimes it does (accidents and unforeseen things happen). It's not done on purpose.

Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by wpietri on Thursday October 13, 2016 @09:31PM (#12705598)
I know you don't set up the system, so I'm not blaming you here. But this is the problem:

> Our daily schedule is packed with meetings and we try to be as on time as possible

If Google's goal were to respect the candidate's time, interviewers wouldn't have daily schedules packed with meetings. The less slack in a system, the worse the failures are. That employees try to be "as on time as possible" is a sign that everybody understands the scheduling is unrealistic.

This isn't unusual, by the way. Most hiring processes don't optimize for candidate experience. Or even for good hiring decisions. Indeed, if you take a POSIWID view of typical hiring processes, the point is to make interviewers feel powerful and selecting for people people willing to put up with inefficiency and suspicious power dynamics.

Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by civilian on Thursday October 13, 2016 @03:34PM (#12703411)
I remember reading an article that this is how they interview for product managers? Not for engineers, but product managers are people who maybe need to deal with more craziness.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by Morgawr on Thursday October 13, 2016 @03:36PM (#12703426)
I admit I am not familiar with the interviewing process for the non-engineering sides of the org, but I'd still find this very unlikely and weird. We are very very strict in our meeting and timing policies as our meeting rooms are usually packed with people all the time so we really need to be in and out at the given time. It's counter-intuitive that somebody would delay a meeting on purpose...
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by jpatokal on Thursday October 13, 2016 @06:56PM (#12704845)
I interviewed for product manager at Google. It was tough, but no craziness involved: flew in, had a day of interviews, flew back.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by protomyth on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:14PM (#12702805)
If that's true (and I would love to know if it is), then Google should know that is a big no-no in a lot of cultures, and there are much better ways to test for it. Some still hold the broken word to be an indication of people you don't want to deal with, ever.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by kcorbitt on Thursday October 13, 2016 @03:02PM (#12703169)
A counterexample can't prove that that never happens, but I interviewed with Google this year and every interaction on the phone or in the in-person interviews began within 3 minutes of the agreed-upon time. So I have a hard time believing this is a general policy.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by gubby on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:34PM (#12702969)
This is not the case (I work for Goog).
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by rockdoe on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:49PM (#12703088)
You unintentionally screw with the timing? (I had the same happen)
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by gubby on Friday October 14, 2016 @02:51PM (#12710271)
Nobody intentionally screws with the timing like was speculated. It's possible individual meetings might be a few minutes late I guess, can't comment on that.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by sfrailsdev on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:39PM (#12703006)
And you are on a hiring committee?
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by gubby on Friday October 14, 2016 @02:52PM (#12710277)
The hiring committee meets after all the interviews are conducted, so isn't really relevant here.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by joesmo on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:08PM (#12702772)
Yeah, I've heard this too. If it's true, it just shows what assholes they are when it comes to respecting people's time. Which I think is the original point of the article which comes in loud and clear: Google will waste your time; don't interview there.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by sfrailsdev on Thursday October 13, 2016 @02:37PM (#12702987)
When I was starting out, Doing well in the Google interview process was a nice confidence booster.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test by serge2k on Thursday October 13, 2016 @03:29PM (#12703381)
Unfortunately they will just ignore the complaints and move on to the next resume in the pile.