Live data from Hacker News

Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

news.ncsu.edu

481–490 of 1001 posts

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#481

It's ironic that people who want the job will be nervous and might interview poorly but people that are only interviewing for experience or just don't care will do better.

I used to work in a client facing role for enterprise software before I got into programming. The ability to stay cool and override nerves with sheer adrenaline that I developed by attending high pressure client meetings is 1000x more helpful to me in technical interviews than any leetcode practice problems. If you have the basic technical knowledge and problem solving skills then 99% of the interview is just staying calm enough to use them properly without coming off like a nervous mess. Much easier said than done, I know.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#482

I'm a ex-FANG dev that started a recruiting company, so I am VERY familiar with the arbitrary tech interview process. I'm a huge proponent of contract-to-hire. Even started a company* to make it easier for companies to offer contract-to-hire. Now before you dismiss the idea because you are "too good" to do C2H hear me out. Everyone knows that actually working with someone on the job is the only way to get an accurate…

Sorry, but C2H sounds like a great idea to you because you have the luxury of having already earned FAANG money on your side. You'd have to pay me considerable money for me to consider taking a C2H role so I could cover health insurance across the usual suspects (general health, dental, vision, specialists just in case). Like many people outside of this website (and enough here), I don't have the luxury of FAANG money and I live in the United States, so I need health coverage either through my employer or on my own provided I have enough money to offset it.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Couldn't tell an average from a median Without meaning to attack you personally (especially in the context of the rest of your comment), a comment like this annoys me a bit. I presume by "average" you mean arithmetic mean, but the median is also an average, and depending on the context the median might be a far more useful statistic than the mean. Confusing the mean and the median is one thing, and perhaps you actu…

I know nothing about GP, but note that it is possible that English is not his first language, and the subtleties of the story and vocabulary might be lost in translation. In my native language (French), as you describe it, there is no word for "average" (the technical and the common terms "moyenne" are exactly the same). Until your comment, in English, I assumed you could use "average" and "mean" interchangeably.

My native language is English and I'm fluent and well educated.

Although I do know that "average" covers mean, median and mode, when I was young I was not taught that way. First I was just taught "average" with a formula, and many years later "median" and "mode". I don't think I noticed the term "mean" until I learned about median and mode.

You can see this reflected in scientific calculators used at school, where the button for calculating mean is labelled "Avg".

And in Microsoft Excel or LibreOffice Calc, the function to calculate mean is called "AVERAGE".

So nobody should be hard on themselves for not knowing the difference. You probably weren't taught the difference, and common tools work against it.

It looks to me that the common word for statistical mean is "average" in English, but it's not the correct technical language.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#484
post #6

Huh, the only successful interviews I have are the ones where I'm burned out after a long, fruitless, frustrating job search. And so I walk in assuming the interview will be a waste of time and just not caring anymore. That's when I get an offer.

That can help a lot with anxiety. If you think it's pointless and you'll never get the job, you have a chance to just have fun with it and do what you can do. My first time interviewing with Google (in 2008), the press was reporting that they were in a hiring freeze, I had no big names on my resume, so I figured it was basically hopeless and I'd just do the best I could and enjoy my trip to Silicon Valley. After my i…

What’s frustrating to me is clearly you’ve spent 10+ years on the industry, worked at big cos like Google and startups, passed Google onsite twice, and still got rejected by all those companies. Which would be fine if industry execs weren’t constantly bemoaning about talent shortages and difficulty hiring engineers. They’ve established a cultural pattern of talking about how acceptable it is to reject highly qualified engineers, labeling them “false negatives”, then refuse to introspect on that when discussing why they find hiring challenging. (I’ve also spent 10+ years in industry, 3+ years as a Google SWE, and got zero feedback rejections from companies like Stripe and many many others in the last few years.)

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of a whiteboard interview for me isn't about accuracy and efficiency. It's about seeing whether the person can code and can talk to me about coding.

Everyone says this but has anyone been hired if they can’t come up with working code in the session?

Yes, of course. I rely on compilers, linters, and editor syntax highlighting when writing code, so it'd be pretty hypocritical for me to penalize people who can't access those things. People can sketch out a pretty messy pseudo-code implementation if they want, and then we'll just spend the rest of the interview cleaning it up, making it correct, extending it, talking about quirks of their implementation.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#486

The only good way to assess a candidate is to hire them. It's sad, but true. Some of the brightest and best will not even be able to code with someone else even paying the remotest attention to them. Interviews used to take account of this 15 years ago. Google came along and destroyed this. I remember talking to a Google interviewer and I came up with a better solution than they expected. Since my solution was non-st…

I used to interview at Google and think you're misunderstanding why you failed the interview. If the solution works and is better, then the interviewer should recognize that. I have this happen often when I use a new-to-me question (well, not often better, but similar enough performance). Even if the interviewer failed you for something they shouldn't have, it'd raise a flag in the hiring committee if you passed the…

Do you understand why I failed the interview? That's absurd. How can you understand if I've not even given all the details? Your process is somehow bullet-proof and guaranteed to be followed? Probably because that's the assumption Google is predicated on. It couldn't have happened, so it didn't. I mean, logically, that's true.

> And I have no idea what you mean by the "tools" and "how to operate them" being false and failing.

I mean I consider my skill-set (what they're buying from me) to be my theoretical / intellectual ability, in addition to the practical activities I take when using the computer to achieve my job (using a mouse, keyboard, git, c++, testing). The interviewer mentioned they are looking for generalist programmers who don't consider their tool-set (git, windows, whatever) to be part of their skill-set. While I am quite general, I consider it a plus that I know such a wide range of different technologies. It was my question which prompted this, I asked about this very thing since I know it's a sore spot at Google, knowing a few Google employees and some Google coops. I believe this is the reason I failed, the interview completely changed his tone at this point.

In any case, the interview didn't test anything I would have done on the job, or my ability to do such things. It also didn't even test my intelligence independently of my preparedness, since there's so much preparatory material available, though it did eliminate people with lower intelligence who didn't prepare.

I failed the interview because of a number of reasons, but I definitely solved the problem. The typical process wasn't followed as this was right as COVID hit. So maybe that had some effect as well, this was the second phone interview with a new person (the first one I completed the problem, but there was a glitch and the call dropped and we couldn't recover for some time), and I've been ignoring the recruiter for years. I think I didn't really want to work for Google in the first place, so that probably also came through. I'm a big proponent of privacy and against Google's advertising business model.

I think based on the interview process I'm no longer considering Google anymore, despite still having another interview in six months. I will probably inform the Google recruiter in the future. It's just a waste of my time to prepare for such a silly test. When the main book to get the test is a book about how to cheat it and appear better than you are, it shows that the test is completely broken. Maybe a company the size of Google should hire people for short internships where they code throw-away prototypical problems and do some paid work. Maybe on a problem that takes some time and planning. I'd do that, even today. I think Google has lost most of the individuals who actually have an impact in this industry beyond search.

Maybe that's why the process won't change, Google isn't selecting for some traits which are commonly sought after.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are very wrong. Every single software person I know at a FAANG spend multiple weeks studying leetcode style questions. Think about it: you are passing an exam. Why wouldn't you study the questions that you know are going to get asked? It got even worse lately since every candidate does this, it raises the bar for the expected solution.

Maybe the people you know there are not that great.

Looking at your history, looks like you work for Google and bought into the cult that you must be great because you passed the interview.

maybe the people you know there don't want to admit they spent some time studying questions? Maybe they bought into the cult of the "Google only hire the top 1%?" (which is very far from being the case).

FAANGs interview are the most predictable tech interview in the industry, why wouldn't you do it?

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've been arrogant for years and you know what? So have I. I and many, many people in this industry have been doing this for years. What's different from you and many other people is that you admit and face your bias rather than justify it. I'm seriously curious what google interview board members have to say about this study. People like Gayle Laakmaan have been saying things to justify the whole process for years…

I interviewed a lot of people while I was at Google, and sometimes the people were clearly, clearly too anxious to interview. Like one fresh-grad who's hands were shaking. I thought about how much pressure the kid must have been under. You try to help them relax, but you don't have much time, and the whole thing is just so unnatural. Other places I've since been at, and interviewed with, give you a laptop, a problem…

Microsoft interview. I was just graduating college, and was super anxious walking in to my first interview. The interviewer realized that writing on the whiteboard was going to be awkward for the problem he was asking me to solve so he let me just sit down at his computer while he hung out to to the side and watched me work in notepad. I think that was the best way to do that interview, because the second I started writing code my brain flipped in to code-writing mode and everything relaxed. One of the better interviews in my career.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#489

I'm a ex-FANG dev that started a recruiting company, so I am VERY familiar with the arbitrary tech interview process. I'm a huge proponent of contract-to-hire. Even started a company* to make it easier for companies to offer contract-to-hire. Now before you dismiss the idea because you are "too good" to do C2H hear me out. Everyone knows that actually working with someone on the job is the only way to get an accurate…

I love the idea from the employee perspective! How can I be sure that the employer is right for me? With c2h I can test that.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#490
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having multiple respectable people that can vouch for you is a much better performance predictor than a 1-day interview. Same reason that recommendation letters are more important than GRE tests for the ones seeking PhD studies.

Hiring primarily based on references almost guarantees bias. White engineers will tend to know more white engineers. Asian engineers will tend to know more Asian engineers.

This assumes white engineers only knows other white engineers etc.

This is very much not how the Silicon Valley I've been in for decades works!

Post reply on HN