4 ms·

As somebody who just dealt with about a dozen rounds of these kinds of interviews as part of a job search, this post was extremely close to home. While I never

As somebody who just dealt with about a dozen rounds of these kinds of interviews as part of a job search, this post was extremely close to home. While I never got a question nearly that intractable, I did get a lot of questions that toed the line between "this is a useful algorithmic test" and "this is about minutiae and what you remember." One thing I've found interesting was examining the various ways different companies handle the tech screening process. I've had everything from no real tech screen to back to back algorithm-based interviews. It's definitely possible to suss out what a company cares about from the sorts of questions they asked. The biggest issue for me was that I never really was unable to get the right answer, but that wasn't always what the interviewers were looking for. I got told at least once that they expected me to simply be faster. I wasn't sure how to take that. Looking back, all but one of the several companies from whom I received job offers had processes requiring coding-intensive tech screens that placed only minimal restrictions on the time one could take. The job I took was actually with the company that had the MOST intensive process (though that wasn't really a factor in my decision). I don't think I'm incapable of doing the jobs at the algorithmic-questions companies who rejected me, any more than I think myself incapable of the job I was hired for. In fact, the work at each organization was quite similar. So, am I missing something, or are they, or both?

deciplex 11y ago
> So, am I missing something, or are they, or both? They are.
soham 11y ago
Interviews, by definition, are not standardized tests. The more you think like they are standardized tests that should be done objectively, the more useless agony you're taking on yourself. It's never going to happen. It can't. On the spectrum of human interactions, interviews are closer to a date, than they are to an exam. If you make a connection with your interviewer during that hour, (via whatever topic it is), they will go at lengths to hire you. Yes, you're expected to solve the given technical problem reasonably well, but beyond that, you have to leave it to "chance" and "pray" that you get a good panel. That's how it SHOULD also work. Because YOU are also interviewing them at the same time. If you don't get inspired with the interviewers, you should also not join that company. i.e. you're also looking for a human connection. I train for technical interviews for a living, at our exclusive bootcamp for interview prep: http://InterviewKickstart.com http://InterviewKickstart.com . Our entire theory is based on this premise i.e. that interviews are not a standardized exam; they cannot be gamed. All you can do is practice technical stuff really really well. In the end, who gets hired is not in your hands. And that's okay.

deciplex 11y ago

> So, am I missing something, or are they, or both? They are.

soham 11y ago

Interviews, by definition, are not standardized tests. The more you think like they are standardized tests that should be done objectively, the more useless agony you're taking on yourself. It's never going to happen. It can't. On the spectrum of human interactions, interviews are closer to a date, than they are to an exam. If you make a connection with your interviewer during that hour, (via whatever topic it is), they will go at lengths to hire you. Yes, you're expected to solve the given technical problem reasonably well, but beyond that, you have to leave it to "chance" and "pray" that you get a good panel. That's how it SHOULD also work. Because YOU are also interviewing them at the same time. If you don't get inspired with the interviewers, you should also not join that company. i.e. you're also looking for a human connection. I train for technical interviews for a living, at our exclusive bootcamp for interview prep: http://InterviewKickstart.com http://InterviewKickstart.com . Our entire theory is based on this premise i.e. that interviews are not a standardized exam; they cannot be gamed. All you can do is practice technical stuff really really well. In the end, who gets hired is not in your hands. And that's okay.