I read things like this and I just wonder... Who are these people talking on the Internet, and what universe do they actually occupy?
Because they have some decent points about how the interviews they've been in have been flubbed by the people conducting the interview, but they seem ENTIRELY inconsistent with my experience at any place I've interviewed ever, and I don't think it's my experience any time I've conducted an interview either.
Maybe I'm just not working in the wrong part of the industry? I mean, I think I've gotten some variety in interviewing, like: Silicon Valley - a small-to-medium networking software startup, and a small social media startup. Seattle - Amazon. NYC - Bloomberg, a tiny mobile-software company, and a medium-size very-late-stage media startup.
... and they all have about the same in-person technical-interview processes, which is to say, a little bit of talking mixed with a series of exercises like: here's a toy question, go solve it for us. I say "okay, here's what I'm thinking, X Y and Z, this what you mean? do you care whether it's built more like this or more like that?" start throwing some code on a whiteboard, etc etc
I'd rather let the thread die down a bit before I respond.
I think I hold the record for bad interviews amongst my friends when I was asked to write my traditional Chinese name on the whiteboard. I'm not going to pull any punches here. I've simply lost faith in the interview process, and in the way we vet each other, and the way that we manage and communicate with each other, and I think that a core root of it is how we approach the interview process. The valley was supposed to be a collegiate and egalitarian environment, and I hope we keep it that way.
I think it's like anything, it has more to do with the individual differences.
For most people, cooking and eating aren't a big deal. Others create Soylent because it's too much to bear.
For most people, the standard interview process is fine. For others with self esteem (or other) issues, the process is so threatening they have to opt out entirely.
Because they have some decent points about how the interviews they've been in have been flubbed by the people conducting the interview, but they seem ENTIRELY inconsistent with my experience at any place I've interviewed ever, and I don't think it's my experience any time I've conducted an interview either.
Maybe I'm just not working in the wrong part of the industry? I mean, I think I've gotten some variety in interviewing, like: Silicon Valley - a small-to-medium networking software startup, and a small social media startup. Seattle - Amazon. NYC - Bloomberg, a tiny mobile-software company, and a medium-size very-late-stage media startup.
... and they all have about the same in-person technical-interview processes, which is to say, a little bit of talking mixed with a series of exercises like: here's a toy question, go solve it for us. I say "okay, here's what I'm thinking, X Y and Z, this what you mean? do you care whether it's built more like this or more like that?" start throwing some code on a whiteboard, etc etc