Live data from Hacker News

The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

firstround.com

61–70 of 118 posts

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no shame in admitting that I would rather use high-level mathematics and programming to play "multi-million dollar poker" on Wall Street than join half of the startups and big tech companies and have a boring job churning out insignificant apps at a desk. In fact, the way you phrased it, being a quant sounds really fun :) you don't want to play multi-million dollar poker? I mean, sure, meaning and existentiali…

That's the fundamental problem. The function of the finance system in a healthy economy is to ensure efficient allocation of capital. Playing poker has a neutral to negative effect on the system.

Well you're the one who used the word poker, so I guess it depends on your definition here...but the financial system somewhat revolves around poker.

Valuations of companies are only important to investors because of the inherent gambling. If you purchase capital at a single valuation that never rises or falls, what's the point? Even an index fund pursues gradual increases over time.

...Or am I building a strawman here? Is this not where you were going?

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#62
post #43

In my 10 years at Amazon, I interviewed lots of engineers and I think Amazon's interview process is fatally flawed. Of course Amazon is still able to hire good candidates but I believe it is in spite of this process and not because of it. Here were the most frustrating aspects of interviewing for me: 1. Bar raisers don't ask questions that they themselves don't know the answer to. I believe this is what Roseman is re…

There's one thing this article misses, and one thing I totally disagree on. Hiring for prior experience - the author emphasizes this, and based on my experience this should be de-weighted. The issue is that as soon as you start to define an area of experience, your hiring pool shrinks dramatically. Consequently you are more likely to pick a less powerful engineer. Another, bigger downside here is that companies are t…

Being partly facetious here: I don't know how you actually propose not to hire jerks. The industry is full of jerks. Jerks are doing the interview much of the time. The industry wants people who claim to be the best, and that's hard to do while also selecting for niceness.

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#63
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it should have been obvious from the context that I was talking about a substantial number of the HN commentators who are working at me to start ups (nothing wrong with that but its not world changing rocket science) Soory if you have problems with reading as a literate dyslexic I had no problem with reading writing not so much :)

[deleted]

> core tenant

You mean "core tenet."

Please don't be a dick to people about flaws that you share with them!

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#64
post #62
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's one thing this article misses, and one thing I totally disagree on. Hiring for prior experience - the author emphasizes this, and based on my experience this should be de-weighted. The issue is that as soon as you start to define an area of experience, your hiring pool shrinks dramatically. Consequently you are more likely to pick a less powerful engineer. Another, bigger downside here is that companies are t…

Being partly facetious here: I don't know how you actually propose not to hire jerks. The industry is full of jerks. Jerks are doing the interview much of the time. The industry wants people who claim to be the best, and that's hard to do while also selecting for niceness.

The industry wants people who claim to be the best, and that's hard to do while also selecting for niceness.

Absolutely true. The reason I point this out is that the cost of a jerk goes up as the size of the team he/she is on increases. If you are a 3-man start-up, hiring a superstar coder who's sometimes a PITA can be worthwhile - have them work on some part of the project where they drive the whole thing. At 20 people, that person can become a huge liability - they will misdirect the team, demoralize other engineers, and eventually cause your best people to leave.

My examples illustrate how you might identify people with an uncontrollable mean streak during the candidate process, and hence filter them out. If you're building a scalable organization you must start with founders that aren't jerks and weed these people out of the candidate pool. If you start the company off with such a person, well, either live with it or find a new company.

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#67
post #36
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no room in the Amazon interview process to "try out" a candidate for a week or two in a real world setting to see how they perform. When looking for work, I have no room for companies that want to do this: I already have a job and commitments. Also, I might not even be in the same state as the company I am talking to.

How is trying out a practical for anything other than unemployed new grads? I see this constantly suggested but I don't know a single person who would even consider quitting or taking vacation time to go work for a prospective company.

Although this would work for people who are unemployed. I took a 3 months contract position, and I was hired full time after 1 year. It's been 2.5 years and I'm still at the company.

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#68

In my 10 years at Amazon, I interviewed lots of engineers and I think Amazon's interview process is fatally flawed. Of course Amazon is still able to hire good candidates but I believe it is in spite of this process and not because of it. Here were the most frustrating aspects of interviewing for me: 1. Bar raisers don't ask questions that they themselves don't know the answer to. I believe this is what Roseman is re…

I remember my own interview process with Amazon. I wasn't interviewing for an SDE position but a TPM role. I made it through the gauntlet and it all fell down due to Amazon's grossly unrealistic understanding of what the going rates for experienced PMs are.

I mostly had fun with it, but I was also frustrated.

The phone screens were the hardest in a purely technical sense, lots of algorithm questions that really didn't have anything to do with the job at all, I had to reach into my way-back machine to dig up some of the runtimes. But I made it through three of phone calls like that and had a bit of fun. After the phone calls and a chat with a senior person in the department, I was pretty sure I had a feel for where I was going to end up and what kind of projects I'd be managing. So I boned up on management theory and algorithms and a few other odds and ends.

Flying out to Amazon for the face-to-face, I realized I was wrong. Each face-to-face interview was wildly unfocused, I was interviewing in subjects the interviewer often didn't have any experience in and completely didn't reflect the nature of the phone interviews or the statements I had been given by the senior guy I spoke with. In one interview I'm designing Java APIs for movie tickets, in another I'm specifying contingency plans for overseas warehouse fulfillment issues. In another I was asked by two very junior people who frowned in confusion the entire time as I discussed complex employee and co-worker conflict resolution cases I've experienced over the last 18 years. In fact I was never asked a question about the first 15 years of my work experience, most of which would have been more relevant. But I was asked tons of questions about my side-startup, which was just me and my wife hacking around on the side and getting passive ad revenue and had no relevancy at all to the job.

The "lunch chat" was with somebody who couldn't have made small talk if he had a gun to his head. He just sat in silence and ate his soup the entire time while I uncomfortably ate one of the sloppiest turkey pesto sandwiches I've ever encountered.

I definitely didn't nail the face-to-face, but that's because I was playing trivial pursuit with the interviewers and the answers were arbitrary, instead of knuckling down on the job, the role, the department, the expectations of performance and the responsibilities of the position.

But I did something right because I was called in the next day to go over compensation and was blown away to find out the absolute max pay cap for the entire company was almost a 20% pay cut from what I'd been making in my previous job (a job that I was leaving because I was 10-15% under my peers and had been in a pay freeze for 3 years while the company worked towards profitability -- and yes it was from a metro area with a similar cost of living to Seattle).

Despite that, Amazon would have been good to work at, but even my absolute pay floor was 10% over. I even asked to make up the compensation difference with a mix of stocks or other methods, but eventually we had to agree that there was no way I could live the life I had become accustomed to with what Amazon was willing to pay.

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#69

> [he] believes every phase of the process needs to be meticulously designed to drill deep into skill sets, ... and leadership potential Ugh. I hate this. For a technical interview, why is leadership potential a priority? Speaking for myself, I've done the leadership thing and don't care for it. People tell me I'm good at it, but I still prefer dealing with algorithms over humans, and I actively decline offers for "p…

> For a technical interview, why is leadership potential a priority? Probably because in many modern ways of organizing knowledge work, distributing leadership roles is an important part of the way organizations operate. > Unfortunately, no matter where you go, there's always the deep-seated cultural mindset that manager > worker. The places where that is least true are also the places where evaluating leadership pot…

Probably because in many modern ways of organizing knowledge work, distributing leadership roles is an important part of the way organizations operate

Does it work, by which does it produce the desired results or benefits? It seems somewhat likely that this would have a side-effect of pushing employees to asserting a dominating personality.

Re: The anatomy of the perfect technical interview from a former Amazon VP

#70

> [he] believes every phase of the process needs to be meticulously designed to drill deep into skill sets, ... and leadership potential Ugh. I hate this. For a technical interview, why is leadership potential a priority? Speaking for myself, I've done the leadership thing and don't care for it. People tell me I'm good at it, but I still prefer dealing with algorithms over humans, and I actively decline offers for "p…

I agree re: the cultural mindset. And I definitely get preferring algorithms over humans. But I don't think leadership necessarily has to = management. Leadership can simply be about being persuasive, degree to which you deal with hurdles/stupidity/whatever without killing somone, able to facilitate a contentious discussion/meeting etc. - those soft skills that make you a good teammate, defacto team lead if/when nece…

I do agree that that form of leadership is necessary. I was inferring a more literal interpretation of leadership, though, considering the associated word, "potential".
Post reply on HN