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

Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

blog.interviewing.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 394 posts

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#191

Post by seattletech »

WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #129
jacquesm wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic. I had a similar thing happen a while ago. US based company - not named to protect the guilty - wanted me to move to the United States to do some pretty specific work for them. I'm not open to such offers but they went out of their way to make the invitation, offered to fly me out there and a whole pile of other buttering up bits and pieces. So I said if they wanted me that badly, could we do this remote? You…

I always love getting a question about "Why are you interviewing for this position?" and replying "I got an email from your internal recruiter". The follow up is usually "Why do you want to leave your current company?" replying with "I'm not, your recruiter said this was a cool place".

Yeah that just drives me nuts. If you're recruiting, you're trying to sell me on the position.

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#192

Post by bradlys »

NHQ wrote: post #33

How did they get 60 interviews? Do I really need to join LinkedIn?

Beyond this person being very desirable... probably just applied and responded to a lot of recruiters.

I don’t think I’ve interviewed with 60 places in a month but I’ve certainly done around 60 interviews in a month. (10+ days of onsites, lots of phone calls) But, I think it’s quite rare. I was desperate for a job and sucked at interviewing. (Ahem, and I still suck at it)

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#193

Post by opportune »

naberhausj wrote: post #180
opportune wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a lot of people who have “accepted” exploding offers but then just keep interviewing and will try to renegotiate or just reneg if they get a better one.

"Let your 'yes' be 'yes' and your 'no' be 'no'" I would personally feel uncomfortable doing this as would a lot of the people I know.

I agree I wouldn’t do this. I wouldn’t actually feel bad doing this if my offer were exploding but I would worry about burning bridges. Most of the people I know who were doing this were new grads

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#194

Post by compiler-guy »

jnwatson wrote: post #88
compiler-guy wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reasonable period is: You tell them up front your ideal timeline, that you have a couple of other irons in the fire (if you do), and you keep them informed of the progress of those other fires. And they do the same for you. Maybe you can't get a timing that works for both sides together, but that is OK. The pressuring is what isn't.

I've been the recruiter in this position. I think it is unethical to string your runners-up along in this situation. You're essentially taking up their (and your) valuable time with little chance at success. Exploding offers are the least bad solution. Give them 48-72 hours, with a small extension if they are currently talking to someone else.

As long as everyone is up front about everything, there is nothing unethical about it.

If your prospect isn't buying what you are selling, you need to make your offer better.

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#195

Post by sumtechguy »

Galanwe wrote: post #107
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #66

As someone with 20+ years in the experience, red flag #1 for me is being expected to go through a skill-testing technical whiteboard (or similar) coding exercise before even having a deeper discussion about the role and whether there's a fit, etc. I've seen this many times and I find it baffling: I already have a very high paying high quality job, I want you to sell _me_ on the position before demanding I do stressfu…

After being on both sides of the interview situation for quite a while now, my feeling on this is more nuanced. The thing is, when you look for a job, you will often go for 5 to 10 interviews. On the other end, when I'm looking for someone to fill a position in my team, I will interview at the very least 50 candidates. That is to say, all things equal, the interviewer has most likely more incentive than the interview…

This is really why I use the 'easy' type questions (some variation of fizbuzz or something simple). A senior guy will crank it out in 5-10 mins. I then ask a question or two on how to improve it and a mini walk through of what they did and why. I also make it clear I sometimes get people who just can not do it but have the resume chops for it. I then usually spend the rest of the time digging on previous techs they have used, problems solved, etc.

The annoying ones are dudes who want you to somehow do a big O proof of some NP complete problem, with tests, proper code, and in front of 3 people in 45 mins (with 5 left for you to ask any questions). For something you may have not touched in 20+ years. I do not want a guy who can create the proof. I want a guy who can explain it in plain English to the 3 other guys in the group and maybe take a few days to get it right and make the code easy enough to understand so when we have to change it in 8 months they can pick it back up.

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#196

Post by user5994461 »

chris_va wrote: post #162
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #66

As someone with 20+ years in the experience, red flag #1 for me is being expected to go through a skill-testing technical whiteboard (or similar) coding exercise before even having a deeper discussion about the role and whether there's a fit, etc. I've seen this many times and I find it baffling: I already have a very high paying high quality job, I want you to sell _me_ on the position before demanding I do stressfu…

I think this viewpoint is common from senior engineers but not entirely merited. (FWIW, I am also a senior engineer, and I have seen this play out from both sides of the table.) Sometimes folks overestimate their value as senior engineer for certain types of companies, and under-appreciate the risk companies take in hiring an employee. Large companies, for example, generally do not need yet another L6+ that cannot ge…

L7/L8 positions are comparable to the director of a department with 100+ people underneath in a large company or the owners/executives at a smaller company.

Of course people in these positions don't code, they couldn't be further away from developers. It's fine that FAANG want heads who can code AND run a department but it shouldn't come as a surprise that candidates don't match that.

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#197

Post by song »

NationalPark wrote: post #182
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, I think lots of people perform 'low skill' in a whiteboard scenario that are not. And the arrogance of their interviewers gets them on HN making very bold claims about other people's skill levels without consideration for the scenarios involved. Don't get me wrong-- I've worked with very incompetent people. Many of them would have passed a coding interview though.

I felt this way too until I was made to start giving interviews. However low a bar you're imagining, I assure you I've seen "strong on paper" candidates who failed to meet a lower one. I don't know if people are lying, or people cheated through school, or talked other people into doing their work at the jobs they claim to have had, but it's really astonishing how unable to write code they can be. However, the particu…

I was going to write a similar comment when I saw yours. We've recently hired someone who was great on paper, was adept at talking about software/programming and was able to present some code he allegedly wrote and explain it. He seemed like a great fit based on the discussions but we hadn't actually given him a whiteboard interview.

Once he joined the company he proceeded to actually be completely unable to write a single working piece of code. Everything he wrote needed to be reviewed and had major glaring issues. When confronted about it, he would say that he couldn't figure it out so decided to just commit his unfinished code.

That guy was senior, had worked for 20 years and is really good at talking but when it comes to actually developing software, he is completely utterly incompetent.

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#198

Post by guhcampos »

I had already accepted a position in a local bank when they called me again because one of my future colleagues wanted to ask me some further questions.

I got there and met with a guy who had 3 or 4 "AWS Certified" pins attached to his shirt. He wanted to know how I had learned AWS since I did not have any courses or certifications on my resume.

I dropped the position immediately after.

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#199

Post by umeshunni »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #163
StillBored wrote: post #23

Role clarity is a huge one in my book. I've turned down numerous offers because when I asked what the specifics of my day to day job were going to be, the answers weren't clear. From the secret FAANG that likes to pretend what they are doing is defense contractor level top secret, and even after your hired you might not know what your actually working on, to the big companies where its clear the hiring manager only h…

> Role clarity is a huge one in my book. Yes, if you want to be a cog in a machine. That said, it seems you're complaining about FAANG-type companies. These guys are hiring "top talent" only as a defensive measure, so that upstart competitors don't get them. It's not expected for "top talent" to actually contribute to something useful.

> These guys are hiring "top talent" only as a defensive measure, so that upstart competitors don't get them. It's not expected for "top talent" to actually contribute to something useful.

Citation needed

Re: Red flags I saw while doing technical interviews

#200

Post by Wohlf »

hrktb wrote: post #92
kempbellt wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Role clarity issues during an interview feels like going on a date with someone who doesn't know if they want to be in a relationship, or would rather adopt a parakeet. They don't understand why they are talking to you, "but maybe you can, I don't know, maybe do something of value here, but we don't know what that is. So here's a bunch of money. FIX US". It's usually a sign of lack of vision by leadership in the comp…

It can be great if you have things you want to do that most companies don’t come up by themselves. Basically if you’re in a “Shut up and hire me!” mode and will self-manage and come up with what others also need to do. I find it tiring, but some people thrive in these roles.

I enjoy this, the problem is often that key people don't actually want to change, or the core issue is somehow intractable.
Post reply on HN