Live data from Hacker News

My Nightmare Interviews With Google

businessinsider.com

21–30 of 145 posts

Re: My Nightmare Interviews With Google

#22
post #15

In engineering school, we got pretty familiar with BOEC (back of the envelope calculations), in some part to give a double check on calculations, and in other part (ahem) to double-check on slide rule calculations and exponent correction. But that is a useful skill, particularly in conjunction with a problem-solving attitude which they repeatedly emphasized us to do. And the book Innumeracy by Paulos gives examples o…

This was for a marketing position though, not an engineering position. I wouldn't expect someone trained in marketing to be good at BOEC or be as analytical as an engineer.

Re: My Nightmare Interviews With Google

#26

These seem like soft-ball questions all around. Phone screening is such a pain in the ass, I am surprised that more people don't have a timed web form or similar setup so we can avoid having to waste the hours talking to people that aren't going to make the cut.

> avoid having to waste the hours talking to people that aren't going to make the cut.

chicken/egg... how are you going to know that without talking to them?

However, to that end, could you just raise the bar on the resumes and also the subequent first-round phone screens to reduce the number of 2nd-, 3rd-round interviews? The Google application (for non-college recruits) is already extensive and probably acts as a weed-out mechanism for many people deciding to just apply on a whim.

Re: My Nightmare Interviews With Google

#27

That wasn't a nightmare interview; she is clearly unqualified for an analytical role. She should get a job in advertising instead.

To be honest, a moderately intelligent 5th grader could have answered that question about the 10 cents per ad. I know that math isn't her field, but on some level one is expected to be well rounded.

Re: My Nightmare Interviews With Google

#28
post #24

That wasn't a nightmare interview; she is clearly unqualified for an analytical role. She should get a job in advertising instead.

Sounds like that's what she was doing... "Associate Product Marketing Manager"

I realize that she was under some pretty severe stress, but a marketing manager that thinks gmail earns ~$70,000 a day? Or that each user will click on seven ads a day?

“Google places four ads per e-mail opened in Gmail. Advertisers get to pick their click-through rates, which can be as little as $0.05...Say each G-mail user opens seven new e-mails a day. They would see 28 ads. If they click on ¼ of those ads, then only seven ads are clicked."

Gmail probably has something like 150 million users, so her figure of 7 ads clicked per user at a minimum of 5 cents a click would result in 52.5 million dollars a day. At some point she should have realized the void between her new analysis and her original $70,000 guess. The whole point of the question is to examine your analytical and estimation skills. The fact that she didn't notice that she was moving towards and answer 750 times the size of the her last one says a lot.

Re: My Nightmare Interviews With Google

#29

Her last answer really did her in, I think. She said she was "wishing [the number of graduating seniors] was higher" since she was amid a job search. That would mean more competition for jobs. That indicates a lack of critical thinking skills.

I think the gmail answer would have sunk her too. Google is an advertising company -- 1/4 (25%) clickthrough on Gmail ads (not even search) is just crazy. People click search ads because they're looking for something, Gmail ads probably get an order of magnitude less click through (people aren't in gmail to find new things). For someone applying to an advertising company, she needs to know their basic business model and assumptions.

If she thought about her own usage, she'd realize that it was an insanely high number (had she ever clicked on a single gmail ad, let alone 25% of them?).

Re: My Nightmare Interviews With Google

#30
Sounds like she is the "recite facts" type, rather than "quickly think critically" type. Google wants the second type of person, and it appears she is not that. So the interview process worked perfectly; she didn't get a job she wouldn't be good at, and Google doesn't have an employee that doesn't fit with them. I fail to see how this is a nightmare, other than that she'll have to work somewhere that makes her buy her own lunch.
Post reply on HN