3 ms·

> In my experience, asking a question that demands one to recall specific details about a painful event in an interview, which is typically a stressful situatio

> In my experience, asking a question that demands one to recall specific details about a painful event in an interview, which is typically a stressful situation, may produce poor results. Stressful and painful are not the same. Every engineer is going to go through stressful situations. Good ones will learn from them: to minimize the risk of them happening, and to better cope when they do. > If you want to see how a person handles stress, give them a situation that is stressful in a way it'd be on the job How is this any better? > "apologies in advance for the following situation, which is intentionally stressful..." Stressful situations don't send calendar invites. I'm not arguing one should be an asshole during the interview. I've been interviewed by clearly hostile engineers. I didn't like it, and it surely impacted my performance. But real life is like that. Being able to react in a polite and composed manner to an unexpected situation, and recover from it, is a superb data point in an interview.

amorphid 10y ago
> If you want to see how a person handles stress, give them a situation that is stressful in a way it'd be on the job Mainly because you're paying someone to do a job, not to interview. I've interviewed a lot of people, and sometimes interviewing just sucks for reasons that have nothing to do with the interview. For example, say you're homeless, and you get your first interview in quite a while. Landing the job means housing for you. The pressure to perform is enormous, and it's not something you can prepare for. I was homeless for a bit, and in that situation. I don't expect to get a job for which I'm not qualified, but it'd be nice if an interview process allows me to show I can meet the requirements of the position, regardless of the circumstances of my life situation outside of work. I like screening people in for the right reasons, and not screen them out for reasons that aren't really all that important. And when you have a hard time getting any qualified applicants, can you really afford to false negatives?
devopsforlyfe 10y ago
> I've been interviewed by clearly hostile engineers... is a superb data point in an interview. I agree, having someone be clearly hostile to you during an interview (which is often the first impression of what the culture at a particular company is like) is a great data point for the decision on whether to continue with the process of interviewing there.

amorphid 10y ago

> If you want to see how a person handles stress, give them a situation that is stressful in a way it'd be on the job Mainly because you're paying someone to do a job, not to interview. I've interviewed a lot of people, and sometimes interviewing just sucks for reasons that have nothing to do with the interview. For example, say you're homeless, and you get your first interview in quite a while. Landing the job means housing for you. The pressure to perform is enormous, and it's not something you can prepare for. I was homeless for a bit, and in that situation. I don't expect to get a job for which I'm not qualified, but it'd be nice if an interview process allows me to show I can meet the requirements of the position, regardless of the circumstances of my life situation outside of work. I like screening people in for the right reasons, and not screen them out for reasons that aren't really all that important. And when you have a hard time getting any qualified applicants, can you really afford to false negatives?

devopsforlyfe 10y ago

> I've been interviewed by clearly hostile engineers... is a superb data point in an interview. I agree, having someone be clearly hostile to you during an interview (which is often the first impression of what the culture at a particular company is like) is a great data point for the decision on whether to continue with the process of interviewing there.