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

Don’t do interviews, do discussions

thinkingthrough.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 432 posts

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#81

Post by jen20 »

xyzelement wrote: post #74
CalRobert wrote: post #26

I've finally reached a point in my career where I have a great paying job and like it well enough, and really don't give a shit what interviewers think. Paradoxically, I think I interview a lot better. I can steer conversation towards stuff I care about, and if they insist on being annoying, just thank them for their time and leave. Though this might just be a result of being pickier about who I interview with. If no…

>> "honestly I'm really happy where I am, but every man has his price, what can you offer?" does wonders. I would be very surprised if you say literally this and get results. No self-respecting company or manager is going to invest in talking to you if you describe yourself so overtly mercenary. Obviously, when you're happy where you are, money is part of the equation to get you to move, but making it seem like the o…

> culture-centric companies (which are the good ones)

This depends on what you are looking for.

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#82

Post by mehphp »

neeleshs wrote: post #44
01100011 wrote: post #30

Depends on the role and the candidate. If I'm hiring for a lower skill position and the candidate has a strong resume I just might want to verify the resume and confirm they have a basic grasp of the relevant skills. If I'm hiring for a high-output FANG job, you bet your ass we're going to the whiteboard. Sure, I hate it too(on either side of the table), but it's not too much to ask to prove that you can think on you…

I'm honestly curious to know. Can you say more about what your current work entails?

Mostly reversing binary trees obviously

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#83

Post by b20000 »

CalRobert wrote: post #26

I've finally reached a point in my career where I have a great paying job and like it well enough, and really don't give a shit what interviewers think. Paradoxically, I think I interview a lot better. I can steer conversation towards stuff I care about, and if they insist on being annoying, just thank them for their time and leave. Though this might just be a result of being pickier about who I interview with. If no…

this is the way.

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#84

Post by xyzelement »

jstx1 wrote: post #64
jfengel wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with "decent at programming" is that it's often only a fraction of the job. You rarely get formal specifications and clear orders. Nearly everything involves discussion of the user's needs or eliciting the circumstances of a bug. Real programming is very little like they teach in school and even less like coding competition. Being good at programming is great, and mandatory, but if you can't also have a c…

In my experience there's a big difference between an interview and talking/communicating/collaborating with coworkers. I don't think that you can use one as a reliable predictor of the other.

> I don't think that you can use one as a reliable predictor of the other.

It's pretty hard to claim that there's no signal from this kind of interview.

Candidate A: was able to have a conversation with me, asked good questions, explained their thinking well, was easy to follow, etc.

Candidate B: seemed to not understand what I was saying/asking, his answers were rambling and incoherent, and unless I led the conversation he just sat there in awkward silence.

You can't make a prediction about which of these is more likely to communicate well at the office?

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#85

Post by austincheney »

kube-system wrote: post #57
austincheney wrote: post #45

The biggest challenge with software interviews is that you don’t know when to lie. The process is maximally biased and so you have maximum incentive to lie. The only reason to not lie is reputation damage in the highly unlikely case you are caught. In the end you are either hired for more money or you are just wasting your time as a candidate. Most of us really want to be as honest as possible, not just because we ar…

Maybe this works in big companies, but many small companies that I’ve worked at, you’d be caught, even lying on silly little things. The people reading your resume are the same ones you’re going to be working beside, and they’ll absolutely ask you about things you said you knew. And once they find out that you lied about your volunteering experience at your local little league team, your whole resume goes under the m…

There is a couple of problems with that. More than half the time I have interviewed nobody reads resumes. They know your name and kind of how long you have been employed.

Second, you control what appears on your resume. You can spin it how you want by the facts you include and omit. You list the great selling points about yourself and none of the bad. Don’t lie on a resume because its already under your control and it’s a document of record that can follow you from any point in the past.

This tread isn’t about resumes. It’s about interviewing, specifically as a discussion.

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#86

Post by foobiekr »

CalRobert wrote: post #26

I've finally reached a point in my career where I have a great paying job and like it well enough, and really don't give a shit what interviewers think. Paradoxically, I think I interview a lot better. I can steer conversation towards stuff I care about, and if they insist on being annoying, just thank them for their time and leave. Though this might just be a result of being pickier about who I interview with. If no…

This is my experience as well. I no longer interview for things, I interview people who want to hire me. At this point in my career, as an engineering IC, my initial conversations are with the VP/GMs of business units.

Younger me would have been very surprised how much i actually enjoy these conversations with manager types. In my experience, _most_ of the VP GM and CEO types are much broader and more interesting than most engineers tend to believe, at least younger me.

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#87

Post by xyzelement »

tchalla wrote: post #52
01100011 wrote: post #30

Depends on the role and the candidate. If I'm hiring for a lower skill position and the candidate has a strong resume I just might want to verify the resume and confirm they have a basic grasp of the relevant skills. If I'm hiring for a high-output FANG job, you bet your ass we're going to the whiteboard. Sure, I hate it too(on either side of the table), but it's not too much to ask to prove that you can think on you…

> Sure, I hate it too(on either side of the table), but it's not too much to ask to prove that you can think on your feet and solve hard problems if that's what the job is. That's a big IF.

> think on your feet and solve hard problems > if that's what the job is. > That's a big IF.

My experience with FAANGS is that their bar is universal. Even if you're going to a team which somehow won't require solving hard problems collaboratively under pressure, ability to do so is the bar for working at the company.

As the person you're replying to says, they use the interview style that gives them signal about this. And in general, unless one work at a FAANG and understands the roles, how does one think they have the correct perspective on how FAANG ought to be hiring for their roles?

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#88

Post by andrekandre »

kerng wrote: post #37

A friend once told me that he is interviewing Google. I found that mindset very powerful. And the best part, he got an offer but didnt accept it.

yes! 1000x this.

don't let the power asymmetry get to you, take that attitude and you wont easily made nervous or uneasy and instead projects confidence

prepare insightful and incisive questions about how decisions are made, tech stacks, even how executives think about dev process and the business etc etc

as it turns out, many companies really appreciate the thoughtfulness!

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#89

Post by User23 »

CalRobert wrote: post #26

I've finally reached a point in my career where I have a great paying job and like it well enough, and really don't give a shit what interviewers think. Paradoxically, I think I interview a lot better. I can steer conversation towards stuff I care about, and if they insist on being annoying, just thank them for their time and leave. Though this might just be a result of being pickier about who I interview with. If no…

If you’re not willing to walk away from the deal then you’re not actually negotiating.

Re: Don’t do interviews, do discussions

#90

Post by flyinglizard »

jstx1 wrote: post #15

"Discussion interviews" can suck because they're a lie. You're still being examined, and now you have to pretend that you aren't being examined in addition to performing well. Some of my best interviewing experiences have been when as part of the interview I ended up having a discussion about something. But the interview didn't explicitly start with that format in mind. Some of the worst interviewing interviewing exp…

I interview quite a bit of people. I always do it in a laid back, conversational style. When I ask technical questions, somewhere towards the middle or end of the session, I do it because I just want to know that the person I talked with understands some fundamentals (it's never a tricky question; just something basic like creating some threads, etc).

I talk with them about their previous work, stuff they're proud of, their hobbies and other things. I've recruited teams that excelled compared to their peers, and were certainly more fun than others.

Post reply on HN