If you are the type of person who insults others at work, please...please insult me in the interview. It's so much better to find out this type of thing earlier rather than later.
I give this as advice because I don't really care if the candidate likes me or not. What I care about if he can control himself and behave befitting the occasion.
If you can't do that on an interview there is no way you can do that later during normal work.
And I have clear, strict no asshole policy. We come to work to solve problems which does not require insulting each other. There is going to be problems and there is not going to be any insults because we understand we all want the same thing even if we have different capabilities, approaches and value systems.
I understand this doesn't mean people don't want to insult each other. There are always going to be tensions and what not. But I want workplace to be safe space for everybody. There is already enough stress, no need for people to be additionally miserable by asshole coworkers who can't control themselves.
I interview and hire a lot and I really do care and want the candidate to like me. Is this this rare, naive, both?
Now, just because I don't like somebody or somebody doesn't like me does not we can't behave civil and discuss and try to resolve our differences. Or even agree to disagree but still keep cooperating on this and other matters.
It also doesn't mean I have to go out of my way to get people to dislike me. I am trying to be reasonable, fun, I smile and compliment and I try to find and expect good in everybody until I am proven wrong. It is just I try keep this separate from ability to think straight and cooperate with people.
Now I don't worry about questioning a line of code or result since it is an interesting insight into how the candidate thinks and communicates.
A lot of interviewing advice tells candidates to only speak when they are spoken to and to only answer the questions they are given. It is also a cultural thing, in some cultures candidates will absolutely not volunteer any information on the interview. I can't really fault a candidate for doing that.
On the other hand I can create opportunities for discussion, especially when my interests or expertise and the interests or expertise of the candidate intersect.
Sorry I probably didn't explain myself - I mentioned it goes both ways: the discussion should be encouraged by the interviewer (vs "here's a problem I'll check my phone while you whiteboard it"), but the candidate should also seek to do the same - especially if they are senior and good, I expect them to interview me/us. However it's true that it's on the interview to establish an atmosphere where the candidate can be comfortable doing that. I start all my interviews emphasizing this as well as I can, and lead the candidate into questions with stuff like "is there something you would like to know about how we do X here?"
If you don't know why, you must watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
Also, I never said this is my advice. In general I like to volunteer information during interview when I am the candidate. I think it lets me control the situation a little bit better and move to ground that I have much more expertise in.
I am just saying that I can't fault candidate for not doing this.
Show the candidate a piece of code and let them review it, something they'll actually be doing frequently. You'll get an insight into their understanding of the code and how they communicate improvements.
For a follow-up/bonus round ask them to suggest changes and fix it. A candidate that does this unprompted and well is a positive signal in and of itself.
No stressful whiteboarding and trivia questions. Just a relaxed conversation with their peers that they'd regularly have during work.
I'm also not questioning something I know is right.
Mostly, I just let them code. When they're done, I always say ... are you satisfied? some go back and check, others stand pat, but this lets them take a fresh look.
I then have the opportunity to question something I think in my heart is wrong. I the example, he was right and I was wrong.
For things that look ok, I sometimes start a discussion about embellishments they could add or other techniques.
I really try not to be that guy. I just want to get to know them.
This cuts both ways. Interviewers are not by default right. So likewise an interviewer that doesn't know what he's talking and doubles down on it, I'd rather find that out at the interviewer because it points to a dysfunctional organization.
Most organisations, it seems, would be served well by people who constructively handle bullshit/misunderstanding from senior people; for some it's absolutely vital.
The difference is whether you aim at correcting the information or whether you are aiming at the interviewer. I want the first one, not the second one.
The interviewer had on a tshirt that was only fit for rags and did not know anything about the role.
Fast forward to today any interaction with that agency is always like pulling teeth and the lack of knowledge is staggering
If you’re going to be permanently remote, consider buying a low end podcasting or streaming setup. The quality will be fantastic comparative to cheaper options, and it won’t be that expensive to buy.
Most of the time, those mics and the mixer just live in a bag in my closet, so I thought "why not use them?"
The sound quality from an AKG D5 (a decent, but not fancy mic) through a small mixer with a bit of compression applied is just miles ahead of anything you could get from a headset or a webcam mic.
It is a little hard to avoid getting the mic in the picture, but with a bit of creativity, it works well enough when placed just above the top of the frame.
I don’t bother to keep the mic out of frame though; it never crossed my mind.
It's amazingly good and versatile for such an inexpensive piece of gear.
My day is full of other responsibilities. If you don’t like that I don’t think we’ll be a match regardless.
That said, I’d like to add.
Nr 5: Do not use a custom zoom video background, seriously, I do not want to see you sitting in the middle of a city with people walking by, repeating the same pattern every 10s.
Eventually I end up paying more attention to that guy with the hat than you.
Why are you looking for another job then? Are you the type that is just all motion and can't ever stop and focus on something properly?
Why do you want to join our company? If you want to join us why is this interview that you have with us less important than the two meetings you have around the time?
Yes, you are right, we would probably not be a right match. We are looking for candidates that want to get the job.
Imagine you ask a girl for a date. You are 2 minutes late telling her you had to clean up your flat. Then at the end of the meeting you say you can't stay longer because you need to do some shopping.
Two perfectly valid reasons and 2 minutes late is not that much late in itself.
But if I was the girl I would think "this guy is probably not a good match, he just doesn't care about me".
People are probably taking time off out of their workday for the interview. They might very well have other meetings, especially is they are in a senior position.
Taking their current job responsibilities seriously is a good sign for when they'll later work for your company.
If you do not want to work for me, that is fine. I don't mind.
But if you come to interview I want to see that you really want to work for me.
You, yourself, probably would want to see the company wants to hire you rather than being completely lukewarm about it.
People want to see they are taken seriously and they are wanted.
Would you come to a company that organized your interview in some dinky place in the basement with unkempt junior dev who got late to the meeting and at the prescribed time tells you he doesn't have more time for you and you are maybe going to hear from them?
Why do you think companies like Google pamper their candidates and later developers at every possible occasion?
If you asked for an hour of my time, you'll get an hour of my time. If you want an extra 15 minutes to chit chat after, that's fine, just ask for it ahead of time so I can plan for it.
Whatever expectations you hold a candidate to should be reciprocal. So if you're going to hold candidates responsible for blocking off extra time before and after their interview to sit and chat, then you should be doing the same. Which means you should decline any meetings that are scheduled to start within 15 minutes of your interview ending. If you do that, then great, that's wonderful for the candidates who have more time to spend. You should also then tell the candidate up front to allow for 15 minutes on either end of the interview.
This whole idea that a candidate must have a buffer around their interview with you or they don't want to work for you is nonsense. It makes no more sense than saying if I have a 10am, 10:30am, and 11am meeting then that means I don't want to meet with the person at 10:30am. People have other things going on in their life. Employers who realize this, and respect candidates during the interview process, are going to have an easier time hiring good candidates that will also treat them well in return.
I am asking if you want to work for me for next couple of years.
> Whatever expectations you hold a candidate to should be reciprocal. So if you're going to hold candidates responsible for blocking off extra time before and after their interview to sit and chat, then you should be doing the same
Of course, I do the same. I spend time researching what I can find about the person, looking through their CV, getting acquainted with the report from screening. I am looking through your CV to figure out what kind of questions might be good to ask and what are waste of time and generally how to best make use of the time that is available.
Then after the meeting I meet with the manager who would most likely be present on the interview and we discuss our observations and try to figure out if they are or are not a problem and whether we think you can fit our team. We also discuss what did go or did not go well during the interview so that we can improve our interviews in the future.
All of this happens immediately before and after the interview so 1,5h interview can easily take 2,5h of my time. I am never late to the meeting and I always set aside time after the meeting in case our discussion overruns.
And you know why? Because hiring is extremely important, important enough that it is worth to put everything else aside just so that I can do it right.
And if you are a candidate it should matter to you where you are going to spend couple of years.
When I interview as a candidate I put everything else aside for that day so that I can be rested, fresh, calm and focused.
I understand your point that someone acting like they need to bounce from the call can be irritating to deal with, but it is a reality that several candidates might have a whole lot of interviews lined up as closely as possible to maximize their chances of actually landing a job. Add to that the increased commitments of a household, and I don't think it is unrealistic to expect a little empathy from the person on the other side of the call.
It is fair advice to say the candidate should try to remain calm and "not create the perception that you have something better to do" as you initially suggested. It is not fair advice to ask them to free up their entire day and not have any commitments other than a single interview.
And you must realize that you are in a ridiculously privileged position to be able to do so, right?
The other meetings mean I get paid? They provide me with a roof over my head?
If you were guaranteed to hire me by virtue of me attending the meeting, I’d probably peg it a little higher in the order of importance, but as it is it’s very likely a waste of my time.
So yes, I guess you could say I’m not committed enough, but that’s because 99% of the dates that I showed up on time for were secretly courting another guy and just ghosted me.
I think I’m ok, when some life trickles through, while I’m interviewing others. With people not always having the comfort of a separate room to hide in. A remote setup with 2 toddlers running around is sometimes a necessity. And I wouldn’t want to reject someone solely on that basis.
Interviewing is an expensive investment. I spend a lot of time doing the interview and I want to use what little time we have to the fullest extent.
Yes. Even in television broadcasting, they consider audio the most important element. You can got a few seconds without the picture as long as there's audio.
For an interview... we're over a year into the pandemic, if you don't have your audio quality figured out by now then you are not getting the job. I tell the person right away at the start of the interview if their audio is not good, giving them the benefit of the doubt to fix it.
I don't know who 'they' are because that's unfortunately opposite to what I have been witnessing for 1 year. Utterly useless but always present pictures, and a terrible, janky sound has become the standard of remote interview/consulting on TVs. Also don't forget that the new generation of field reporters is the generation who grew up used to favour convenience over quality, so they don't see a problem delivering lives which are barely understandable and, even worse, recorded reports which absolutely should be subtitled (the combo facial mask + bad sound take + bad Internet sound transmission) but which aren't.
Even worse, even on the national radio (the French equivalent of the BBC) which is supposed to have top sound standards; they obviously started using Internet-based public solutions streaming and they didn't give a damn about the sound: very bad and unstable quality, a LOT of lag causing a catastrophic mess of interactions, unreliable (connections very frequently dropping). It's a blessing when they have to drop to phone as they had been doing for decades, at least you know what to expect and there is no lag. Apparently they didn't consider the pro solutions which have been in use for 10-15 years (even my local associative radio had one!), which gave good sound with no lag, and which are a perfect fit at least for regulars; no, they all went using the crappy public app of the month...
Agreed. I was speaking from an academic perspective, and you're right -- this past year has been terrible. It seems that all best practices have gone out the window as everyone tries to figure out how to do remotes with consumer grade tools.
My point was, even in a medium that we mostly consider visual, audio is still more important to communicating the message than the picture. We can take this (pre-pandemic) best practice from television broadcasting and apply it to zoom conferences/interviews.
I got an XLR microphone with a boom arm during the pandemic, and I've also gone full OBS for zoom meetings. It's nice to be able to draw on the screen, share my screen or a picture during a meeting, without having to share screen.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Condenser-Microphone-eirix-Adjustable...
It sounds awesome. Could you describe it in more details?
We were looking for a senior Java dev, we got a guy who had two degrees, 25 years of experience, and started no less than 3 companies. He also never sticked to anything for more than 2 years.
The insults started with his first sentence, before he or we even got a chance to greet each other.
We had some conferencing issues, the company just changed conferencing technology. In the previous any person could start the meeting but in the new one only the person who set up the meeting could start it. So there was some commotion to change the room.
When we joined (about 4-5 minutes after planned start) he said something to the effect that we must be new to this interviewing thing.
Nevermind, I continue the interview.
I ask him why he wants to work as a developer, given so much experience. He said he hasn't been programming a lot recently and wants to "dirty his hands" again. Hmm...
So we go to the technical part where he started manufacturing some false answers and after I pointed out what he says is factually incorrect he decided to critique the difficulty of questions he was getting.
I explained that we give same questions to all candidates for the position. I reminded I said at the start that candidates are not expected to know answers to all questions and that it is perfectly fine to tell us and to skip to the next question.
I sometimes tell the candidates (jokingly) that I give 5 points for telling me he doesn't know the answer. Though I did not say this in this case.
It only got downhill from there after couple more questions. After he gave another nonsense answer I did not say anything but he looked at me and said "WHAT NOW!" And then started tirade that I am not qualified to interview him and can we maybe set up an interview directly with my manager.
Senior here! I'm doing the leetcode grind and in preparation of interview rounds at companies that ask those sort of coding questions: I don' think it's a waste of time, it so happens that those companies pay very well, if you're willing to run the gauntlet. Preparing for the interviews is a signal in itself, as someone who sat on the other side of the interview table, I know the hiring companies needs every last signal it can get.
I hope other seniors keep snootily refusing to do such interviews, for at least the next few months, that way, I'll face less competition :-)
You may not be aware, but anybody can start a company. It is not an achievement unless you call doing a bunch of paperwork an achievement.
Neither is having 25 years of experience. It is just a fact you have been working for 25 years, says nothing about how well you've been doing.
One is that you need to understand the technical questions perfectly so that you can ask deep probing questions, spot when candidate tries to wing it, etc. All the while evaluating various aspects of the answers and trying to figure out if you are getting all different aspects you need.
After all, the best way too interview is to have a discussion with the candidate. If you just have a list of closed questions you could give him a test to fill out.
You also need to be quite self aware of your own limitations and be able to distinguish between objective and your own preconceptions. As an example, I may like strongly typed languages and the candidate may have other preference. You need to be able to recognize that this is only your preference and try to objectively evaluate regardless of this. Otherwise you run the risk of hiring people that are exactly like you which is interviewing mistake #1.
Then I imagine what Aphyr would do and start giggling. It’s often downhill from there. "You have, in fact, heard this one before. In your browser, search for “fizzbuzz solution”, and pick the first link that looks promising. Copy and paste. You are a real engineer.” [1]
[1] https://aphyr.com/posts/353-rewriting-the-technical-intervie...
Second, if I ask you coding question I am not going after your existing knowledge but rather about how you deal with problems to which you don't know the solution for.
After all that is what development is -- building something without necessarily knowing the solution when you start.
Third, I don't care how good coder you are (well, I do a little). What I do care when I ask you coding question is that you can think logically, ask right questions, work with me to find a solution to the problem and also that you can use the tools that are at your disposal.
Development is a lot of abilities and if the only thing you know is how to write more code then that is how you are going to approach every problem. As they say, if the only thing you have is a hammer...
Most corporate software is extremely simple (or at least it should be). Writing REST API to run couple of agreed rules on objects in a database, call an external service or send a message over network is not a pinnacle of technical achievement.
Arriving at the right solution in a large and complex organization, with many forces around you, people trying to overcomplicate your solution, stakeholders trying to drive your design or speed up development because refactoring is for pussies, on the other hand, is.
Now, I interview only senior engineers and up. I expect senior engineers to be able to arrive at a workable solution in a real organization. Coding should not be something that is any kind of problem for you, it is just one of the tools you use to achieve the result.
Well, I can’t fault your perspective. As an interviewee I’d like to complain about interviewing fads and about silly questions with dubious rationale. But I have to agree with your premise, as an interviewer I’ve also tried to make the best of it understanding that my reasoning about such things is imperfect.
No simple answers.
You should not believe everything people complain about.
Also, you don't need expensive microphone. You need decent one set up correctly.
Most microphones are actually pretty decent in that they can record your voice pretty well provided they are set up properly and that is where usually problems are. You need to have correct geometry so that they can do their job of picking your voice and rejecting noise and you need to ensure correct software audio settings because mismanaging these can cause voice to be distorted or sprinkled with clicks and cracks.
Actually a microphone with good noise rejection may help depending on how exactly the audio is being compressed. Less noise will usually cause either less bandwidth used for the same quality or better quality for the same bandwidth.
Then how did they know?
I'd have filed the information and then verified the bandwidth claims. The claim sounds highly unlikely.
I'll try it out on Monday.
It might be causing some other kind of issues but a microphone can't really "take up someone's bandwidth"... That's not really how things work.
I haven't heard anyone complain. Rather, everyone else also bought expensive microphones and enabled original audio, and the results are excellent.
(Unsolicited tip: some sort of noise gate is really nice so that when you unmute, it doesn't raise the noise floor for the call. I ended up using Krisp, which seems to work quite well. Yeah, it's a subscription service for something your audio interface could theoretically do, and they market it as AI but it's not really AI and that's kind of scummy, but it doesn't take up any space on my desk, and it's not that expensive, so whatever. Sometimes it works too well -- people will apologize for their dog barking, or a fire truck driving by, and it's just met with confusion because that all got filtered out.)
I didn't tell them, "I'm about to switch to the microphone", I switched to the microphone and they told me to stop and they claimed it was using all their bandwidth and to go back to using the phone instead of the microphone.
I'll take the downvotes, that's fine, but how did the people complaining know I had switched to the microphone and what were they complaining about?
That's not how I expect your choice of mic to affect anyone else's experience.
It would surprise me if additional network load is part of what happens.
1. Audio, audio, audio... It doesn't matter how good or good looking you are if I can't understand any of your eloquence. Using microphone on your phone or webcam may or may not be adequate, you should test this. There is test call functionality in almost every web conferencing software.
In general having microphone close to your mouth and distant from any noises is safest choice. Headsets are cheap and effective.
Also turn off any feature that changes volume dynamically, this can cause volume to change suddenly to painful levels. For example zoom can pick up distant voice and increase volume suddenly. As an interviewer I am already setting the volume as high as I can before it becomes uncomfortable because I don't want to miss anything you say, having the volume change suddenly makes my life this much more difficult.
2. Just because it is remote interview doesn't mean savoir vivre is out the window. Be on time. Don't interrupt. Don't insult the interviewer (yes, I had this happen to me recently).
3. Don't be obvious looking up answers to my technical questions on the internet. And if you need to google something, try to put it in your words rather than read word by word, because maybe I can do the search myself, too. Yes, this also happened to me recently.
4. Make sure you have peace and quiet for the duration of the interview, before the interview and also some margin after. Set the time aside and remove any distractions. Try not to create perception you have something more important to do. It doesn't look good if are jumping from one meeting to the interview to another meeting.