Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

observer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 225 posts

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#161

Post by logicallee »

gaylemcd wrote: post #120
rocket_woman wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On a higher level - how much of an "already seen the algorithm" crapshot are tech interviews? I'd say it is mostly that. Just do thirty to fifty leetcode medium problems (some of them on pen and paper), and you're good to go.

That is really, really not true. An unintelligent engineer will never be able to practice enough to do well on a well-conducted interview at Google. (They could in rare cases do well if all their interviewers pick common problem.)

If it's really, really not true then why do you write

>will never be able to practice enough to do well on a well-conducted interview

Or in other words a true scotsman interview.

It sounds like you can't bring yourself to write "on an average interview at Google" because you wish they wouldn't pick common interview problems - but they do.

Based on what you just wrote, I'd certainly work through books of "interview questions". Because your phrasing just proved it works, even though ideologically that is not what candidates "should" do.

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#162

Post by famil »

gaylemcd wrote: post #125
famil wrote: post #68

What do you think about take home projects/homework interviews? I've noticed that they have become much more prevalent among smaller companies as a replacement for phone screens. As a candidate, interviewing is already a time consuming hoop jumping process, so if the project will take more than 3-4 hours, I probably won't be interested but most companies I have applied to are keeping these projects short enough.

I think it's well intentioned but highly flawed. 1. The time commitment issue. 2. It allows a company to give a bunch of "interviews" (assignments) even for candidates they aren't serious about. It can waste a lot of candidate time. 3. There is so much cheating on these that you really can't use it for evaluation. It can really only be a screening tool (which makes 4+ hour assignments really unfair). 4. It primarily…

#2 and #5 are issues with the company/hiring manager.

#1, #4 and #7 are issues with traditional interview as well.

#4 It's incredibly difficult to accurately assess potential during an interview.

#1 and #7: This holds true for white-board interviewing. Most successful candidates (including myself) invested time to practice coding interview questions. I did over 150 questions on LeetCode and it dramatically increased my interview skills. But I guess the upside is that these skills are transferable across companies who do algo/ds interviews so my prep time isn't "wasted".

I think #3 is the only thing thats inherently an issue with the project/assignment interview.

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#163

Post by famil »

cr0sh wrote: post #150
famil wrote: post #68

What do you think about take home projects/homework interviews? I've noticed that they have become much more prevalent among smaller companies as a replacement for phone screens. As a candidate, interviewing is already a time consuming hoop jumping process, so if the project will take more than 3-4 hours, I probably won't be interested but most companies I have applied to are keeping these projects short enough.

When I've had them, I liked doing them. Of course, I was usually in-between employers, so I had plenty of time on my hands and no reason to not give it a shot. I could see where it would be a problem if you aren't in that situation, and just looking for a new employer (and depending on your family/home life responsibilities as well). I like such projects (or on-site development tasks) over a whiteboard interview any…

In my case, every company that gave me a take home assignment had on-site white board interviews as well.

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#164

Post by pmiller2 »

kafkaesq wrote: post #147
gaylemcd wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if whiteboard interviews are stupid and ineffective, what process do you think is better? I assure that the big tech companies absolutely do care, but they struggle to find something better.

Whiteboard interviews don't have to be ineffective. But empirical evidence suggests that companies greatly overestimate their ability to conduct them properly.

So, what's a properly-conducted whiteboard interview look like?

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#165

Post by throwawayosiu1 »

gaylemcd wrote: post #4
throwawayosiu1 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried getting interviews at Google and the only time their recruters have contacted me back were from internal referrals (none of those worked out in the end as they wanted me to move to SF, and I wanted to work from Canada). How would one go about getting your foot in the door at such companies (I've had similar experiences with both Microsoft & Facebook as well) ?

Referrals are honestly a great strategy. Often employees will be open to referring you even if you don't know them well. Use social media, Facebook groups, Quora, etc. Recruiters want to be found. Have an active github. Make yourself Google-able. Have a website where you list projects. Screenshots help make things feel more "real", especially if it's a recruiter/sourcer who might not understand some of the technical…

another quick question: in general, would it be considered ok to find recruters (and maybe employees from the same team that's hiring) on LinkedIn and contact them?

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#166

Post by xxSparkleSxx »

sage76 wrote: post #91

I asked someone in the medical profession how he got his recent job. He said he called up someone at the hospital and asked if there was a position available. Got an interview the next day, and started the next monday. On the other hand, I asked a friend in the bay area about an engineering position he had applied for. 13 rounds, and he was finally told no.

My little sister is a travel nurse and whenever she needs a new assignment it goes like this:

1) Talks to recruiter about positions heybhave open, she selects the ones she wants. 2) They send her resume to these hospitals and if they are interested they let the recruiter know. 3) She has a phone interview that lasts 30min-1 hour. 4) If they like her she has an offer within a week, though sometimes within a day. 5) She moves to her new assignment.

She literally deals with life and death and it's a whole hell of a lot easier than any programming/tech interview. She also gets paid very well (her stints around the Bay Area were ~100k, which is awesome for mid-20s).

Tech is steadily losing all of their "alternative ways of doing things." They are just as entrenched in their processes as any other industry.

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#167

Post by OJFord »

Someone attending an interview in a suit? Heaven forfend!

Seriously though, what's the "jeans and a nice top or shirt" "culture" about? It's obviously not "we're so chill" if someone's ostracised for wearing what they want and it happens to be 'too smart'.

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#168

Post by OJFord »

wayn3 wrote: post #53
holydude wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest problem I have with these companies is that they feel like a cult. And the people working there are doing a lot to keep that cult spirit alive. All of these companies want you too feel and act like they are the single best entity in the entire universe and you should be honored that they even acknowledged you. This works great for young graduates that are full of dreams and hopes but it discourages experi…

Corporate jobs dont pay nearly as much as google

Have I missed something; did Google unincorporate?

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#169

Post by zzalpha »

UncleMeat wrote: post #154
zzalpha wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends, are you factoring cost of living into your calculations? 200-300k is sounds like a basic living wage in the bay area these days... What's the point earning that kind of cash if it's gonna be chewed up by housing and transportation?

How on earth can you think that 300k is a basic living wage in the bay. Even with insane housing prices, this is like 10x the national median wage. Knock out 1/3 for taxes and you are left with 200k per year. How are you spending the 190k per year on rent and transportation that would be needed to knock you down to typical post-expenses income levels?

Assume a family and a couple of kids, health care, child care, and transportation and according to this:

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-expensive-is-san-francisc...

You're already at 91,000 for basic expenses.

That puts 200k right around the mark for a livable wage and 300k pretty comfortable (and also at the high end of a senior dev wage by a fair margin).

Re: What I've learned from 100s of interviews with candidates at top tech companies

#170

Post by abc_lisper »

gaylemcd wrote: post #29
meggar wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CTCI is a great book. Is it acceptable to ask an interviewer for a different question? For example, if you're really bad at chess algorithms and you get the N-Queens question?

This is actually a really interesting point. (Context: In chess, a queen can move along a row, column, or diagonal to attack. The N Queens problem is to place N queens on an NxN chessboard such that no two queens can attack each other.) No one does poorly here because they are "bad at chess algorithms." They might do poorly because they think they're bad at chess algorithms. But this is not a "chess algorithm." It's…

I actually solved this problem in my first year of learning programming; mind you I didn't have a computer, only (limited)access to it at college. The only thing I knew was recursion. I thought hard for 3 days, discovered (he hee..) back-tracking and found the solution. For some reason, I cannot solve interview puzzles, and tried and failed to get into Google and FB.
Post reply on HN