21–30 of 394 posts
Why is the font on this article so hard to read? Maybe it’s not the font, but the weight. I had a hard time reading it and stopped part way through.
I can identify with the red flag where they try to pressure you to accept the offer in a short period. This is also called an exploding offer. I had a place do that to me and I ended up turning the opportunity down.
On the other hand, there often needs to be a time limit, or else they will be too late to make an offer to the runner-up (when the leader turns it down). I am not sure what a 'reasonable period' is.
I think the biggest issue is when the time limit isn’t moveable. If you’re finishing up interviews next week and the time limit cannot be moved, then that is a problem. Inflexibility from the get-go is a bad way to start a working relationship.
From the secret FAANG that likes to pretend what they are doing is defense contractor level top secret, and even after your hired you might not know what your actually working on, to the big companies where its clear the hiring manager only has a vague idea what to do with someone because they are simply building an empire.
At least some of them are more upfront and say stupid things like "you get to define your role". Which is fine, if it comes with a grand vision, or your selling them on one, but frequently the grand vision is little more than "evolve our huge product, and justify it". Which is frequently just make work, and you won't be provided resources to actually implement a vision. And you can see this stuff in the public releases of products. Its the split personality of the windows control panel, where someone decided the current one wasn't good for a touch environment, but only had the manpower/political will to fix like the 5 most common things people want to change. So the results are garbage, and are the functional equivalent of 1/2 a wing glued to a car because someone wants an airplane but they only had a car.
One of the worst things about interviewing at the big G.
This article seems like another example of mid-level people giving advice to junior-level people. There are far more red flags you can expect from a company by asking the right questions. The article doesn't dive into any of that and reads more like a few gripes from a guy who did way too many interviews and became jaded by it. The technical interview itself is not likely to be a good indicator of what work looks lik…
Hot takes about interviewing are a dime a dozen because it's an easy thing to have an opinion about, and as long as you punch up then your takes will generally be accepted.
What's always missing from these articles is any empathy for the people on the other side.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, there often needs to be a time limit, or else they will be too late to make an offer to the runner-up (when the leader turns it down). I am not sure what a 'reasonable period' is.
That only applies when the company needs to fill a specific position. Specific positions that need a particular person are a minority of SWE roles. In fact it is bad management to let your team get in a situation where there are individual hyper-specialized roles with no knowledge shared.
"Not Enough Clarity about your Role" - Like the author mentions, this can definitely signify that the role is not important. The other thing I've noticed over my career is that it could be that the role involves "grunge" work (awful oncall shifts, doing backend work when you want to do only frontend, etc). Companies hide behind cool titles/department names/etc, promising whatever you want to hear to get you in.
I can identify with the red flag where they try to pressure you to accept the offer in a short period. This is also called an exploding offer. I had a place do that to me and I ended up turning the opportunity down.
On the other hand, there often needs to be a time limit, or else they will be too late to make an offer to the runner-up (when the leader turns it down). I am not sure what a 'reasonable period' is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, there often needs to be a time limit, or else they will be too late to make an offer to the runner-up (when the leader turns it down). I am not sure what a 'reasonable period' is.
That only applies when the company needs to fill a specific position. Specific positions that need a particular person are a minority of SWE roles. In fact it is bad management to let your team get in a situation where there are individual hyper-specialized roles with no knowledge shared.
These red flags are the norm in the last decade that I have been interviewing in SV. Issue is that everybody is in the game to further themselves first and foremost rather than helping the company or the candidate. I have talked to many colleagues and managers who are only looking for people that can be "used" to get them promoted and this mindset shapes how they interview candidates.