> not a single session even bothered to take into account personality.
So you'd prefer that the interviewers set up situations for unconscious biases to take hold? That would hurt the quality of engineering at Google.
Re:Google, Microsoft, Stall Points, and Growth
by Steko on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @08:41PM
(#9378244)
Perhaps that's not the end of the world. Is Google's primary burden to growth their quality of engineering? I doubt it, so weighing the entire interview on coding skills seems like a mistake, one that is compounded by creating a homogenous culture where everyone has the same blind spots.
Re:Google, Microsoft, Stall Points, and Growth
by outside1234 on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @09:29PM
(#9378402)
The counter to your argument is that many of Google's products, like Google+, feel like something a shut-in would develop. No soul, no emotional appeal, and I suspect it comes out of this engineering is everything (at the expense of product people and creative types) mentality.
Re:Google, Microsoft, Stall Points, and Growth
by crandycodes on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @08:03PM
(#9378123)
What if the "robotic" questions themselves have a bias? They almost certainly do. (They've already turned off people who don't like robotic questions. :P) Demographic diversity is just as important as creative/intellectual diversity - I think diversity of hires requires diversity of questions. It requires some bad interviews, but it creates some great interviews. I've had interviews and been interviewed in both settings; no regrets. White male, though, so hard to say.
was pretty sad. i love search/gmail/maps but there isn't much coming out of google thats pushing the envelope these days for me.
once again the story of david and goliath... infinite growth is not sustainable...