5 ms·
...another reasonable conclusion from this data is that interviewers have difficulty judging interview performance.
by jMyles 11y ago
...another reasonable conclusion from this data is that interviewers have difficulty judging interview performance.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- JFlash 11y agoBeat me to it. When I interviewed at Google there were multiple interviewers and then there were multiple committees and people who look at their feedback. Comparing interviewers to other interviewers makes a "He did above average" from a person who's hard to impress as good as a "She did really great!" from someone else.
- robrenaud 11y agoWell, the hiring committees see the entire prior rating distribution from each interviewer as well as the hires/no hires for each previous rating. So the committees has a decent way of correcting for interviewers who use different scales.
- JFlash 11y agoRight. You'd only know someone was "hard to impress" with that information.
- krick 11y agoInterviewers kinda define interview performance. That's what interview performance is: how good did you appear to the interviewer.
- JFlash 11y agoBeing easy to work with is certainly something interviewers should look for, but software doesn't care how nice you are. Your technical competency should ideally be measured outside of any subjectivity. Of course that's not possible but companies try their best.
- aries1980 11y agoI think it is possible. You can measure technical competency very easily without much human interaction.
- Retric 11y agoIt's incredibly difficult to measure technical competency quickly. If you don't spend a lot of time writing string functions then don't ask about them in interviews. The problem is very few things are short term tasks in isolation. So, someone that takes a while to solve 6h problems can be really efficient in the long term. Worse, short term problems need to fit the same type as what your actually doing. PS: As soon as someone says "i don't know" you need to stop and realize they would spend a few minutes on google. Spending more time on the topic at this point is pointless.
- jdmichal 11y ago> PS: As soon as someone says "i don't know" you need to stop and realize they would spend a few minutes on google. Spending more time on the topic at this point is pointless. Or, give them the answer and see what they can do with the information. IE, pretend that they DID lookup the answer and go from there. Did they grasp the concept? Could they make logical inferences from that new concept? If they can't do it when you tell them the answer, why would you think they could if Google told them it instead?
- Retric 11y agoGoogling gives someone time not just an answer. Sure, for trivia an answer is all you need, but trivia is a waste of interview time. On the other hand if someone looks up a formula they can spend 5 minutes actually understanding it which feels like an eternity in an interview. Remember the context is the Job not the interview. On the job, having not done something for 3 years is a minimal setback for most people as the retraining time is almost meaningless. In an interview that 'highly' skilled person is going to take a long time to get back up to speed.
- 11y ago