People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance • Hacker News Board

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#131

Post by AstralStorm » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 3:11 AM UTC

Myrmornis wrote: post #95

sushisource wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm so mind-bendingly sick of these two terms (Dunning-Kruger and Imposter Syndrome). They're very much in-vouge as of late and it seems like an overwhelming number of /r/programming and HN posts have at least some reference to it. Pulling some piece of psychology jargon out of thin air doesn't make it immediately applicable or accurate. Presumably, the terms get used so frequently for the "look how smart I sound" ef…

Yep. You can pretty much tell when people use those terms that they're more driven by a desire to use those terms than out of having anything interesting to say.

Isn't a single instance not indicative of a syndrome? The syndrome presence or not can only be inferred if the same candidate heard multiple times on various interviews is consistently under- or overvaluing. And by a noticeable amount too.

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#132

Post by wpietri » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 3:59 AM UTC

nsxwolf wrote: post #53

wpietri wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have been talking about the terribleness of tech interviewing for years. If a company isn't able/willing to improve important processes, that's definitely a sign to me.

But then, apparently, there are virtually no good companies to work for. So most people shouldn't bother worrying about it.

Nope. I only have time for one job, and I want it to be the best one possible. It doesn't matter if most companies are shitty; I won't be working for most companies.

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#133

Post by ACow_Adonis » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 4:22 AM UTC

morgante wrote: post #125

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To this and some other comments saying essentially "you can cut it down". Oh sure! I can cut it down to 1 word if I want: awesome :p One of my points is, I have literally not seen a 1 page resume before outside of fast food/janitorial work. Before chatting with her, I would have advised her to fix that up, because no one will take her seriously with a dot point resume that looks like it was put together to hit some a…

Honestly, your comment is extremely rude and offensive. I'm willing to chalk up your preference for longer resumes to cultural differences, but then you come out with bullshit like this: > Your dot point resume looks like an indian from mechanical Turk put it together by amalgamation of keywords from job ads and pop culture. > 1 page screams kid/unprofessional to me. Your 4-page resume is unprofessional, overlong, se…

I do not mean any offense. I really don't.

If you can think of a nice way to convey the same sentiment/message, but without the offence, I'm all ears and would happily edit the post.

Again, let me stress, I think there are arguments for long and short. I do not advocate for right and wrong, merely try to convey the reality I'm in, given that it's so different apparently from SF.

Realise also, in good faith, how offensive the "1 page resume" sounds to my ears. There is not any hyperbole present when I say I haven't ever seen one. Indeed, the only reason I believe it exists is because otherwise intelligent people I respect have told me it does, and now hacker news backs that up.

Really though, is it so hard to believe that people think that summarising yourself down to a page (as opposed to three or four...lol) is also an offensive idea?

Are we really so departed from one another that we believe that we can't just agree that the way our two respective cultures do things is offensive, especially given the fact that neither of them appear to have much success with outcomes regardless of which culture is in play?

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#134

Post by morgante » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 4:34 AM UTC

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #133

morgante wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, your comment is extremely rude and offensive. I'm willing to chalk up your preference for longer resumes to cultural differences, but then you come out with bullshit like this: > Your dot point resume looks like an indian from mechanical Turk put it together by amalgamation of keywords from job ads and pop culture. > 1 page screams kid/unprofessional to me. Your 4-page resume is unprofessional, overlong, se…

I do not mean any offense. I really don't. If you can think of a nice way to convey the same sentiment/message, but without the offence, I'm all ears and would happily edit the post. Again, let me stress, I think there are arguments for long and short. I do not advocate for right and wrong, merely try to convey the reality I'm in, given that it's so different apparently from SF. Realise also, in good faith, how offen…

You are pretending to be civil, yet call people who use a one-page resume "an indian from mechanical Turk."

It's fine for there to be cultural differences. It's not okay to insult people just because their culture values short resumes.

I will be reporting your comment to the moderators. It's abusive and absurd.

> Realise also, in good faith, how offensive the "1 page resume" sounds to my ears.

How can a mere phrase be offensive to you? What offends you about the notion of people using succinct resumes? There are literally thousands of 1-page resumes you could see online, including mine (which I just linked to).

Everyone who uses a 4-page resume is a narcissistic asshole, especially you. Do you really not see how that is an offensive generalization?

Your original comment could have easily been reduced to "in Australia, we typically write longer resumes." There was absolutely no need to insert absurd character generalizations on the millions of people who use short resumes.

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#135

Post by ACow_Adonis » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 4:44 AM UTC

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #133

morgante wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, your comment is extremely rude and offensive. I'm willing to chalk up your preference for longer resumes to cultural differences, but then you come out with bullshit like this: > Your dot point resume looks like an indian from mechanical Turk put it together by amalgamation of keywords from job ads and pop culture. > 1 page screams kid/unprofessional to me. Your 4-page resume is unprofessional, overlong, se…

I do not mean any offense. I really don't. If you can think of a nice way to convey the same sentiment/message, but without the offence, I'm all ears and would happily edit the post. Again, let me stress, I think there are arguments for long and short. I do not advocate for right and wrong, merely try to convey the reality I'm in, given that it's so different apparently from SF. Realise also, in good faith, how offen…

I'm replying to my own comment, since I unfortunately do not appear to be able to reply to the one below...

But...

You do realise what "mechanical Turk" is...as in...the Amazon service called "mechanical Turk" based upon the chess playing automaton, and that it's basic premise is often westerners paying people from poorer countries, say...India, to spit out quick small pieces of work for them.

There is no offense intended in these statements :/

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#136

Post by morgante » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 4:53 AM UTC

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #135

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not mean any offense. I really don't. If you can think of a nice way to convey the same sentiment/message, but without the offence, I'm all ears and would happily edit the post. Again, let me stress, I think there are arguments for long and short. I do not advocate for right and wrong, merely try to convey the reality I'm in, given that it's so different apparently from SF. Realise also, in good faith, how offen…

I'm replying to my own comment, since I unfortunately do not appear to be able to reply to the one below... But... You do realise what "mechanical Turk" is...as in...the Amazon service called "mechanical Turk" based upon the chess playing automaton, and that it's basic premise is often westerners paying people from poorer countries, say...India, to spit out quick small pieces of work for them. There is no offense int…

I'm well aware of what mechanical turk is. Indeed, I've used it before.

It's offensive to imply that people with 1-page resumes just had it generated via mechanical turk. I've spent hours perfecting my resume to have a good layout and clear copy so it could fit on 1 page.

You really need to adjust your value system. Writing a short resume is harder than writing a longer one. In fact, I have a 4-page "master" resume which I pull from to build my 1-page version.

> There is no offense intended in these statements :/

Of course there is. You don't call skilled professionals "kids" unless you're trying to be offensive. Don't play dumb.

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#137

Post by amorphid » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 5:02 AM UTC

fecak wrote: post #84

8_hours_ago wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't pressure them, just give them the offer and continue to sell the company. It isn't like we hold the door shut until they accept :)

I'd be curious what percentage accept/reject on the spot, but I'd never ask a candidate to provide an answer either way if you present an offer right away. It's too important a decision for them not to at least take the night (especially after a day of interviews, a flight/hotel stay, an impending flight home). Even suggesting an immediate answer feels salesy ('whaddya think?'), and I'd think we'd see better results…

I like asking the question, "if we were to extend you an offer you like, would you accept it?" It's not perfect, but I haven't of a better approach that isn't pushy.

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#138

Post by ACow_Adonis » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 5:33 AM UTC

flamedoge wrote: post #107

ACow_Adonis wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fascinating to me. I recently did a resume swap with an American lady I know (I'm Australian). We're both around mid thirties. She's in SF. Her resume was 1 page. It's the first time I've ever seen a 1 page resume in my life except for someone out of highschool with no history or experience. Mine is 4 pages. I've worked really hard to cut it down to that while including relevant things and nice formatting/rea…

wtf... do ppl write essays on resumes? even 4 pages is too long nowadays. need to tl;dr.

Well, understand that it is not uncommon where I live to draft a cover letter at least.

For government jobs it's even worse, there you basically do have to write essays against the "selection criteria" (don't get me started on what it actually achieves, again, I'm not trying to advocate).

The general rationale is often on several grounds:

-to create a "merit" based document trail - to create a basic barrier to entry that has to be crossed for all but the most basic positions. Think of it like a spam filter/ensuring candidates who want THAT job as opposed to just A job. The very thing you don't want is to have hundreds of 1 page dot point resumes coming in. How would you possibly find the time to go through them? You want to stop people applying just by sending in a generic summary resume and clicking a button. You want people who are willing to put a bit of work in to apply specifically to the job you're advertising.

It is not uncommon for me, for instance, to write a cover letter for each job, and craft a specific version of my resume for each position, emphasising and exposing those parts of my experience most applicable to that particular position.

You can only really do one or two of these well per week, but that's kinda the point.

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#139

Post by mcv » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 8:05 AM UTC

fecak wrote: post #7

>some portion of interviewees are losing interest in joining your company just because they didn’t think they did well, despite the fact that they actually did. This is the key takeaway for me. This is IMO and experience probably based on a "sour grapes" type defense mechanism, where candidates will internally try to talk themselves out of wanting a job that they felt they didn't get. They walk out of the interview f…

My wife is currently in this situation. She's not a new job seeker by any means; she does mid-to-high-level management, leading complex projects. She recently applied for a new job that she's really enthusiastic about, but with them not responding, she's rapidly losing interest. She would be a perfect fit, but lack of a timely HR response could cost them a good employee.

Of course lack of a timely response also reflects badly on the company, so that could also be a very valid reason for people to lose interest.

Re: People are still bad at gauging their own interview performance

#140

Post by fecak » Fri, Sep 09, 2016, 11:57 AM UTC

amorphid wrote: post #137

fecak wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be curious what percentage accept/reject on the spot, but I'd never ask a candidate to provide an answer either way if you present an offer right away. It's too important a decision for them not to at least take the night (especially after a day of interviews, a flight/hotel stay, an impending flight home). Even suggesting an immediate answer feels salesy ('whaddya think?'), and I'd think we'd see better results…

I like asking the question, "if we were to extend you an offer you like, would you accept it?" It's not perfect, but I haven't of a better approach that isn't pushy.

How about "Is there anything in your situation right now that would prevent you from accepting a solid competitive offer?" That's a little less salesy IMO.