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

Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

meekg33k.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 247 posts

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#171

Post by BallCramp »

ModernMech wrote: post #55

> Not enough clarity about your role I experienced this one to the extreme. Not only would the recruiter not tell me what the scope of the job was, neither would the interviewing engineers nor the hiring manager. I went to the on-site interview with the promise that I would be working on "world-changing technology". The location of the interview was a nondescript building in the Bay area with an off-limits engineerin…

> They kept me in a 10x10 cubicle with a white board and small table for 6+ hours during which a parade of engineers came through to ask me puzzle questions.

Do you ever wonder whether it was all some kind of psychological experiment? That there really was no job. And the test was to see how long you'd sit there doing puzzles?

> None of the interviewers could answer simple questions like "What do you do?" or "What am I going to do?"

Only the control group was given that information. :P

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#173

Post by dbish »

mcqueenjordan wrote: post #14
dbish wrote: post #10

My biggest annoyance is late interviewers who then try to rush you through a question. I’ve had multiple interviews in the past where they are around 10 min late when you’ve taken time from your day and they barely acknowledge it, then clearly rush for time. I guarantee they also write down in many cases that they didn’t get enough data points, not noting that a big part of that is their own time management problem (…

I've been in hiring committee debriefs where "I was missing a few data points on X, but this is offset by the fact that the interview started Y minutes late, so we had less time than anticipated" explicitly called out in the written feedback.

I've seen it occasionally as well, but I've also seen many cases where I had to probe folks interviewing (when i was the hiring manager) if they gave the candidate time to answer the question and gather data when it looked like they didn't. The issue too is that even when called out, the candidate doesn't get a plus for that area, instead it may be omitted where it could have been a strength to help balance areas where they were lacking.

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#174

Post by dbish »

kylecordes wrote: post #89
dbish wrote: post #10

My biggest annoyance is late interviewers who then try to rush you through a question. I’ve had multiple interviews in the past where they are around 10 min late when you’ve taken time from your day and they barely acknowledge it, then clearly rush for time. I guarantee they also write down in many cases that they didn’t get enough data points, not noting that a big part of that is their own time management problem (…

This is tricky. On one hand, as an interviewer you want to leave room for interviewees to express themselves as fully as possible. On the other hand, the purpose of the interview is for both parties to gain as much information as possible about whether both want to work together - and this is often not optimized by having each question point go its full length, but rather by getting just a bit of information on each…

I agree, however if the interviewer is late to the interview, they have started on the wrong foot for planning and getting the data they need

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#175

Post by ghaff »

Espressosaurus wrote: post #159
temp667 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

72 hours is not a quick timeline. I've routinely set shorter (48 - 36)... Just say no if you don't like offer so company can move on.

72 hours is quick. A week is more reasonable. I had one company try to pull a 48 hour decision on me and I straight up told them I was declining the offer if they didn't give me more time to consider it. They backed down. This is a decision that will impact my career trajectory, and I may have other offers coming. So yes, I want enough time to consider all options before making a decision with ramifications that will…

I'm not sure it's so much time to consider as time to tell any others companies you're also through some part of the process with (especially if you're already through interviews) that they need to make a formal offer to you now or you're going elsewhere.

Maybe it's just me but if you just have one offer letter in hand and have probably already thought about what it would take to take an offer, I can almost certainly make a decision in an evening.

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#176

Post by Sodman »

sethhochberg wrote: post #25
vmception wrote: post #21

>I turned down the [exploding] offer because the experience got me thinking about the company’s work culture. Were the methods employed by the company to get me to accept the offer indicative of their work culture? I've never found the interview process to be reflective of the company. I find the interview process to be a random hodgepodge across the entire industry because nobody knows what they are doing. Small/not…

From the hiring side, a (reasonable) expiration on the offer helps be fair to the other people who are interviewing, too. If I have a single position open and multiple people interviewing, as a hiring manager I really need to know whether my top choice is serious once we're having a discussion about signing a contract - because if they aren't, or are still trying to land better offers from other places because they h…

You have to take it on a case by case basis. I think the important thing is to have a candid conversation between the candidate and the employer.

"I have a final round interview in two days with another company that ends a 3 week interview process, and I'd like to compare offers"

is a very different response to

"Thanks for the offer, there's 8 or 9 more companies that I'd like to apply to before making a decision, can you give me 2-3 months to get back to you?".

Having a conversation gives both the candidate and the employer another data point. How serious is the person about wanting to work for your company, and how much does the company want to hire you as a candidate? It also just feels like a healthier way to start the relationship.

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#177

Post by jahewson »

neilv wrote: post #68

If someone is doing 60 technical interviews in 30 days: 1. When I'm hiring, I wish the resume sites have an indicator when a person is interviewing excessively or indiscriminately, so that my company doesn't waste our time. 2. In the rare situation that I've been interested in working at a particular company, I wish I knew better ways for my interest to stand out from the "shotgun approach" applicants. I did see one…

As an interviewee I wish the resume sites had an indicator when a company is interviewing excessively or indiscriminately so I don’t waste my time.

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#178

Post by chrismcb »

devoutsalsa wrote: post #31
sethhochberg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the hiring side, a (reasonable) expiration on the offer helps be fair to the other people who are interviewing, too. If I have a single position open and multiple people interviewing, as a hiring manager I really need to know whether my top choice is serious once we're having a discussion about signing a contract - because if they aren't, or are still trying to land better offers from other places because they h…

I liked to ask the question, "If I extended an offer you like, would you accept it?" It helps facilitate a regular conversation about if & when someone would accept an offer, and if any steps can be taken to make an offer happen.

How is this a good question? The only acceptable answer is "yes" otherwise the interview is over.

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#179

Post by dmos62 »

throwawayacc2 wrote: post #163

So, this is cynical but I actually look for some of these red flags specifically. For me they are not red flags. For me they are green flags. Not enough clarity about your role - Consistent lack of interest or low morale from interviewers - Perfect , the less enthusiasm the better. Your interviewers aren’t prepared for the interview - Oh yeah, love those ones. Lack of a clear direction on where the company is headed…

Haha. I'll upvote you, because I want to see others' responses.

Re: Red Flags I Saw While Doing 60 Technical Interviews in 30 Days

#180

Post by enraged_camel »

WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #142
d2ncal wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you probe for these skills? Are there any questions that help you to identify them?

You can get a feel for it... ask about personal projects, then follow-up on why. The best candidates will cop to "I wanted to check out the new tech (curiosity)", "I wanted to learn the new programming language (learning)".

This comes up a lot on HN and the common objection is that the criteria you listed discriminates against talented people who have families (for example) and therefore no spare time to indulge their curiosities by learning new languages or whatever.
Post reply on HN