Interviews vs. auditions
ryanholiday.net
Interviews vs. auditions
1–10 of 106 posts
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#2Taking control audition style may work if you're a consultant trying to convince a client to hire them, but you had better know their business backwards and forwards, and unless you're in a very well defined space (like their football coaching example), you probably don't.
However, if you attempt this at a standard FAANG job interview, it is emphatically not going to work. There's a set of questions you need to work through and attempting to go off script is not going to be appreciated. Pretty much the only exception is leadership roles, particularly when the brief is "we need somebody who can turn around/10x our floundering business".
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#3Would reframing the developer "technical interview" as an audition instead create better expectations for everyone?
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#4Taking control audition style may work if you're a consultant trying to convince a client to hire them, but you had better know their business backwards and forwards, and unless you're in a very well defined space (like their football coaching example), you probably don't. However, if you attempt this at a standard FAANG job interview, it is emphatically not going to work. There's a set of questions you need to work…
It's worthwhile to distinguish between decision-makers and information-gatherers. FAANG interviewers have notoriously little decision-making power, though if you're given a time slot with your potential hiring manager, this approach might be worth a shot.
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#5Taking control audition style may work if you're a consultant trying to convince a client to hire them, but you had better know their business backwards and forwards, and unless you're in a very well defined space (like their football coaching example), you probably don't. However, if you attempt this at a standard FAANG job interview, it is emphatically not going to work. There's a set of questions you need to work…
what is FAANG?
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#6Taking control audition style may work if you're a consultant trying to convince a client to hire them, but you had better know their business backwards and forwards, and unless you're in a very well defined space (like their football coaching example), you probably don't. However, if you attempt this at a standard FAANG job interview, it is emphatically not going to work. There's a set of questions you need to work…
what is FAANG?
FB AMZN AAPL NFLX GOOG
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#7Taking control audition style may work if you're a consultant trying to convince a client to hire them, but you had better know their business backwards and forwards, and unless you're in a very well defined space (like their football coaching example), you probably don't. However, if you attempt this at a standard FAANG job interview, it is emphatically not going to work. There's a set of questions you need to work…
what is FAANG?
Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Google
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#8You’ll just get knocked back for being tone deaf.
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#9Well... this article is merely saying (with many many words) that it’s way better to show up to interviews and important meetings with utmost preparation than unprepared.
Re: Interviews vs. auditions
#10Taking control audition style may work if you're a consultant trying to convince a client to hire them, but you had better know their business backwards and forwards, and unless you're in a very well defined space (like their football coaching example), you probably don't. However, if you attempt this at a standard FAANG job interview, it is emphatically not going to work. There's a set of questions you need to work…
It's worthwhile to distinguish between decision-makers and information-gatherers. FAANG interviewers have notoriously little decision-making power, though if you're given a time slot with your potential hiring manager, this approach might be worth a shot.
A good interviewer wants to stay on their script not because they're a disempowered automaton, but so that they can contextualize your performance relative to others they've given the same questions.
Your job on an interview loop is to collect the best signal you can about the candidate's strengths in the assigned topic. You have broad latitude to use your professional judgement in going about that, but what makes your assessment persuasive in a debrief is calibration. An "original" interview may be a useful and necessary cost paid by the employer to train and calibrate a new interviewer, but opinions based on that interview have to be discounted appropriately in actually assessing the candidate.
On the other hand, if you're a seasoned interviewer with a long-term favorite question, and report that the candidate's performance is an outlier in either direction, your voice alone could completely change the debrief room's opinion.