5 ms·

This can quickly backfire and you don't get to know anything you need to about the candidate. I use the behavioral interview process. I spend 10 minutes revie

This can quickly backfire and you don't get to know anything you need to about the candidate. I use the behavioral interview process. I spend 10 minutes reviewing their resume before the interview. I introduce myself to the person at the start of the interview, about 5 minutes. Then I explain my interview process to them so that they know what to expect though the interview, it helps put people at ease to understand what is coming. Then I dig through their history, asking who they've worked with (yes, get names, people are inherently more honest when they use real names). Ask anything you want here. For technology I find it useful to dig into the areas they find most exciting, and discover how well they actually know those areas. This should last about 20-30 minutes. I try to focus on the thing that are important to the job being interviewed for, but this is also a great place to see how personable they are. After this I turn the floor over to them, allowing them to ask any questions until the end of the interview, generally 10 minutes. In total this is structured for an hour, I think more than that is too much, personally.

fsloth 10y ago
"Allowing them to ask any questions until the end of the interview, generally 10 minutes." 10 minutes sounds like a really short time for candidate driven discussion, IMO. Personally, when I've been the candidate, I treat the interview as a two-way discussion. I'm I suited to the job, are they an employer that I feel comfortable with. If there is no time reserved for myself leading the discussion, or I feel I would have nothing to discuss anyhow, is an indication to me that no matter the technical requirements, the position is not a terrific match. The best interview sessions I've had have evolved into a detailed discussion about technical details, business angles and organizational skills, lasting well over an hour. But those interviews were in a situation where the candidate pool was very limited.
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  The earlier portion should be in the form of a conversation, not some point and shoot questions. I think you need this to get at the details you as an interviewer need, but it doesn't mean they can't interject questions, that's how conversations work. 10-15 minutes of candidate led questions, gives them the floor entirely after that, and I've never found it to not be enough time.

fsloth 10y ago

"Allowing them to ask any questions until the end of the interview, generally 10 minutes." 10 minutes sounds like a really short time for candidate driven discussion, IMO. Personally, when I've been the candidate, I treat the interview as a two-way discussion. I'm I suited to the job, are they an employer that I feel comfortable with. If there is no time reserved for myself leading the discussion, or I feel I would have nothing to discuss anyhow, is an indication to me that no matter the technical requirements, the position is not a terrific match. The best interview sessions I've had have evolved into a detailed discussion about technical details, business angles and organizational skills, lasting well over an hour. But those interviews were in a situation where the candidate pool was very limited.

bluejekyll 10y ago
The earlier portion should be in the form of a conversation, not some point and shoot questions. I think you need this to get at the details you as an interviewer need, but it doesn't mean they can't interject questions, that's how conversations work. 10-15 minutes of candidate led questions, gives them the floor entirely after that, and I've never found it to not be enough time.