4 ms·
I think both of them are, because none of the problems are really good for explaining your thought process. In fact, it is a contradiction to try and think abo
by MCRed 11y ago
I think both of them are, because none of the problems are really good for explaining your thought process. In fact, it is a contradiction to try and think about a solution to a problem and to give a dissertation on how you're thinking about the problem. You can do one or the other, and in the latter case you have to have solved the problem previously.
What I do is ask people about a problem they have solved and get them to teach me about it. If I learn something then it's a good result.
Asking people to solve a trivial problem AND let you into the inner workings of their brain-- normally a non-verbal activity- isn't testing their abilities.
- skybrian 11y agoIt's not about giving a dissertation. It's about collaborative problem solving. Granted, the interview is rather artificial and considerably more stressful, but you use the same skills when talking about how to solve a tough problem in front of a whiteboard.
- fennecfoxen 11y agoSo you nest the toy problem inside a toy system. For instance, instead of just asking people to tell you if someone has won tic-tac-toe (a trivial program-yourself-out-of-a-paper-bag exercise to establish confidence) ask them to design the server side of a client-server tic-tac-toe game. Start with the trivial problem, then move on to all the system design questions that you'll want a software engineer to ask in your system and which require serious communication on a team. (API design for the tic-tac-toe server? Application lifecycle? Scalability? Latency? Take your pick.)