11–20 of 155 posts
Anand would do well to read the room. This is why soft skills are so valued. If he sees he’s annoying the vp with too many questions, maybe dial it back. Does Anand want the job or want to be right?
I’ve had this experience. I passed all of the interviews only to be failed by a senior manager that had some kind of expectation I couldn’t figure out. About 6 seconds into a phone call, I’d failed for not matching whatever expectation he had for how a phone call should go. As far as I can tell, he expected me to do everything his way without being asked. That was truly bizarre. I think I dodged a bullet there.
So if this type of thing let's us dodge bullets, maybe nothing should change?
Anand would do well to read the room. This is why soft skills are so valued. If he sees he’s annoying the vp with too many questions, maybe dial it back. Does Anand want the job or want to be right?
He wants to be right. A job interview is not like an exam, it's like dating. An opportunity for two parties to decide if they can work together. Hiding who you really are to 'pass' is a bad foundation. That's why I don't like the conclusion of the article. Anand didn't fail the interview because the criteria were wrong - the interviewer failed because they suck at being an engineering manager.
you'd be surprised at the amount of people who fake themselves for the date.
Both types of workplace exist, and both types of candidates exist. The question for me is why the article author sent a type-A candidate into a type-B workplace. So that they could write an article about how they "educated" the VP?
Anand would do well to read the room. This is why soft skills are so valued. If he sees he’s annoying the vp with too many questions, maybe dial it back. Does Anand want the job or want to be right?
It's sad when "read the room" and "soft skills" are equated to agreeableness and making management comfortable. A company that thinks this way has only one real brain, the one in the head of the leader. Everyone else's job is to agree with that brain, not use their own brains to question it. If the leader happens to be a world-historical genius, this might work, but that's not true in most cases, so such a dictatorial structure doesn't seem likely to be the foundation of a successful company.
I’ve had this experience. I passed all of the interviews only to be failed by a senior manager that had some kind of expectation I couldn’t figure out. About 6 seconds into a phone call, I’d failed for not matching whatever expectation he had for how a phone call should go. As far as I can tell, he expected me to do everything his way without being asked. That was truly bizarre. I think I dodged a bullet there.
Bingo! Remember that the interview process is bidirectional, you are also interviewing them to see if you want to work there or not :))
The set up of this article doesn't make a lot of sense. It describes a case where "not a good fit" was in fact exactly that; the candidate wanted an open workplace where he could express opinions and grow his skills, the hiring manager wanted an experienced resource who would do as they were told and not rock the boat. Both types of workplace exist, and both types of candidates exist. The question for me is why the a…
This is a problem. It means the best output you're going to get is that of the level of the person doing the telling rather than the person who's first-hand doing and learning. I see this all the time. I once wondered why sometimes a new club/bar would open up, sparing no expense, but then the music would sound like shit. Not the sound system, but the DJ. It's because they were hired by someone who had more money than sense and didn't actually have good taste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He wants to be right. A job interview is not like an exam, it's like dating. An opportunity for two parties to decide if they can work together. Hiding who you really are to 'pass' is a bad foundation. That's why I don't like the conclusion of the article. Anand didn't fail the interview because the criteria were wrong - the interviewer failed because they suck at being an engineering manager.
> it's like dating ... Hiding who you really are to 'pass' is a bad foundation. you'd be surprised at the amount of people who fake themselves for the date.
Anand would do well to read the room. This is why soft skills are so valued. If he sees he’s annoying the vp with too many questions, maybe dial it back. Does Anand want the job or want to be right?
He wants to be right. A job interview is not like an exam, it's like dating. An opportunity for two parties to decide if they can work together. Hiding who you really are to 'pass' is a bad foundation. That's why I don't like the conclusion of the article. Anand didn't fail the interview because the criteria were wrong - the interviewer failed because they suck at being an engineering manager.
There’s really no use searching for the perfect job when the market is flooded with candidates and you have young children and mortgage payments due, yet you have to act like every job you’re applying to is some gift you’ve been searching for your entire life!
Anand would do well to read the room. This is why soft skills are so valued. If he sees he’s annoying the vp with too many questions, maybe dial it back. Does Anand want the job or want to be right?
He wants to be right. A job interview is not like an exam, it's like dating. An opportunity for two parties to decide if they can work together. Hiding who you really are to 'pass' is a bad foundation. That's why I don't like the conclusion of the article. Anand didn't fail the interview because the criteria were wrong - the interviewer failed because they suck at being an engineering manager.