Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem • Hacker News Board

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#31

Post by oculusthrift » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:21 AM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #5

> Your interviewers try to understand what it feels like to work with you on a daily basis. If that were true then why not simulate those situations rather than riddles, google-able CS trivia, or whatever the interview flavor of the month is? I'd actually argue that for many companies this post is true (i.e. that getting it "right" is less important than the journey) but I still won't forgive companies that design th…

even if you wont. millions will apply and try to break down the doors to get in

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#32

Post by DannyBee » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:22 AM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #10

joshuamorton wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are manhole covers round, and similar brainteaser questions have been banned at Google for ~5 years at least. They're only the new normal if you're a decade behind the curve.

My link from Glassdoor has feedback from interviewees from as recently as days ago. You can see the types of interview questions Google is asking right now. The sentence you're referring to was in the context of the FIELD which is why it said as much, and the specific question is a very well known stereotypical example: > But disrespectful and unprofessional interview questions ("why are manhole covers round?") has b…

"If you browse my link you'll see that Google continues to ask off-topic questions, even if they aren't riddles or brainteasers.

"

I have read literally thousands of interviews at Google (both on hiring committees for 10+ years and in the group that reviews hiring committee decisions), and i just don't encounter them much. I can't even remember the last time i read this type of question.

I suspect your definition may be different than mine.

I do see that new grads/folks without a ton of experience get asked more questions to test fundamentals (not riddles), and folks otherwise get asked to just solve problems.

I have also seen occasional a few unscored warmup questions that are more abstract/riddlish for nervous people, but even that's pretty uncommon. It's usually small talk about resume instead.

Interviewers are also deliberately pushed to ask different questions if the candidate is not doing well (though it's slow to change interviewing behavior on this). Rather have signal on more questions than knowing that they really did badly on a single thing.

That means they may change style/abstractness of question depending on how interviewee is doing.

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#33

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:22 AM UTC

esoterica wrote: post #25

jakelarkin wrote: post #22

"its not about the problem" but if you cant correctly code one of these 200 algorithms on a whiteboard in sub 15 minutes while under extreme stress youre not getting an offer either.

Clearly some people can do that, since Google hires thousands of people every year. Why shouldn't they be hired over you?

[deleted]

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#34

Post by kerng » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:23 AM UTC

I like how the article tried to portrait these interviews as super professional and as if they have like a plan or something. My experience is that most interviewers dont prepare, they probably have been asking the same question for years. And no, they are not simultaneously interviewing for multiple skills, the just try to sound professional. If you are a dev, better leetcode. That's all that matters at Google.

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#35

Post by rrix2 » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:24 AM UTC

starpilot wrote: post #24

Yet another "trust the system" message from the authority figure who enables the system. Similar: - Police officer: Just follow our instructions, be cooperative. - Car salesman: Just be upfront with what you want. Tell us about yourself, and we'll earnestly try to help you. The message is the same; the authority "just wants to help," but in reality the relationship is adversarial to a larger degree than it is coopera…

I read it as "I'm trying to make sure I don't hire someone who isn't willing to work with me, and the system allows me to do that." I can't speak for anyone but myself obviously, but I think I interview at Uber a similar rate to your average Google engineer (2-3 times a week), and our interviewing process is pretty similar to what's laid out here.

In cases where the interviewer is hiring for their own team, I feel like it's reasonable to assume that the interviewer is trying to hire people they want to work with. Acting in their own self interests, as it were.

In some cases that may mean "I want to make sure you are someone I'm able to collaborate with." In some cases that may be "LeetCoding like hell". Regardless, if that's what the interviewer is looking for, the candidate gets a really important insight in to the team they'd be working for and not necessarily indicative of some larger corporate conspiracy.

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#36

Post by DannyBee » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:27 AM UTC

For all the complaining here, Google's system actually works for Google, so i'm unsure why people expect something to change.

The average interview score from a panel of interviews correlates very highly with performance at Google, interviewees report high satisfaction, etc.

If those things changed, i'm sure Google would change it. But why would they change it otherwise?

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#37

Post by SquishyPanda23 » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:28 AM UTC

starpilot wrote: post #24

Yet another "trust the system" message from the authority figure who enables the system. Similar: - Police officer: Just follow our instructions, be cooperative. - Car salesman: Just be upfront with what you want. Tell us about yourself, and we'll earnestly try to help you. The message is the same; the authority "just wants to help," but in reality the relationship is adversarial to a larger degree than it is coopera…

FWIW, I went through the interview process and I actually really enjoyed it.

My attitude going in was that I was evaluating what it would be like to work there, and I treated the interviewer as a coworker solving a technical problem, where I was taking the lead.

The questions I got were pretty much exactly the sort of hing you see on LeetCode, but I hadn't seen any of the questions before. I know from studying for other technical exams that once you reach a certain number of practice problems, pattern recognition takes you a long way.

I had a similar experience at Facebook. Everybody was super nice, they all wanted you to do well, and they all responded well to being enthusiastic and genuinely interested in the problems you're solving.

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#38

Post by joshuamorton » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:29 AM UTC

an4rchy wrote: post #14

I am not sure if this is in the interest of any company but why not provide feedback, as it can only help the interviewees in the future and the companies attract better talent. Even if it's not standardized, a rubrik across X attributes with a scale and a number. (Which is what I am assuming they are doing anyway -- as it sounds likes the interviewers are rating them across different dimensions) Not sure if this is…

Experience says that in addition to liability, failed candidates just try to argue and get upset. People claim they want feedback but then claim that the interviewer must have misjudged them.

More work for the company, and leads to even more negativity in the process.

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#39

Post by ganeshkrishnan » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:29 AM UTC

starpilot wrote: post #24

Yet another "trust the system" message from the authority figure who enables the system. Similar: - Police officer: Just follow our instructions, be cooperative. - Car salesman: Just be upfront with what you want. Tell us about yourself, and we'll earnestly try to help you. The message is the same; the authority "just wants to help," but in reality the relationship is adversarial to a larger degree than it is coopera…

Not sure about Google but in IBM when I was conducting tech interviews I was looking more for team members to help me complete the project rather than trying to project an authority figure. The relationship was never adversarial and if you know how desperate we were to get good skills there is not much option to take the high ground.

The poster is correct that open ended questions that reveals the work ethic of team members are much more important than solving algorithms and hard problems. Intelligence is over rated.

Re: Google's interview system: it's not about solving the problem

#40

Post by yongjik » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 4:30 AM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #8

Someone1234 wrote: post #5

> Your interviewers try to understand what it feels like to work with you on a daily basis. If that were true then why not simulate those situations rather than riddles, google-able CS trivia, or whatever the interview flavor of the month is? I'd actually argue that for many companies this post is true (i.e. that getting it "right" is less important than the journey) but I still won't forgive companies that design th…

Why are manhole covers round, and similar brainteaser questions have been banned at Google for ~5 years at least. They're only the new normal if you're a decade behind the curve.

I joined Google at 2008, and these questions were already banned by then.