4 ms·

Per the article, he went through multiple steps that all seem quite demanding: > The screening interview requires: > A webcam with a clear view of you and you

Per the article, he went through multiple steps that all seem quite demanding: > The screening interview requires: > A webcam with a clear view of you and your room > Granting a tool (admin) access to your computer to make sure you don't cheat > The screening interview consists of a basic coding challenge and pre-recorded video questions to which you must give a response. Your response must be in video format - it cannot be written. After you are delivered a question via video, you are given about a minute to formulate your response and then are required to narrate it back staring into your webcam. I'd consider this "arduous" for a very first step. Then the final stage is 3 days onsite. I'd consider that "long". My scale is other interview processes, not Batman origination stories.

greedo 8y ago
We had an Oracle position that needed to be filled. Headhunter supplied a candidate, we did a phone interview, then an in person interview. Not very technical from what I understand, just Oracle/DBA basics. He starts at our secondary location, and seems to struggle. Simple tasks don't get accomplished quickly, and more complex jobs are incomplete. A few weeks go by, and our DBA manager visits the location, and realizes that the DBA is a completely different person than the one interviewed. Same ethnicity, but different person. He had apparently hired the interviewee to perform during the hiring process. Took us over a month to get rid of him; it was hard to prove that he had acted fraudulently, and the wheels of justice grind slowly. Between actual costs incurred and opportunity costs, it was a royal PITA. Weeding out these posers can be a problem. Again, his first step of the process doesn't seem arduous at all. Inconvenient and possibly annoying? Sure. But arduous is the incorrect word choice. When I was starting out, I had to interview at a headhunting company 2x. Then 2x interviews with the company I ended up at. I would have loved to be put up at a nice hotel during that process instead of having to drive all over meeting people. IBM is clearly responding to fraudulent interviews, plus signaling two things; that they have enough applicants to impose silly video interview protocols, and that once past the "technical" interview, it's all about schmoozing and politics. These signals tell you a lot about a company.
- dunpeal 8y ago
  I'm not really sure what you're arguing. That the step with him posing in front of a webcam to answer questions is common in the industry? It's not. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and hundreds of other companies hire thousands of candidates every year. Somehow they manage to avoid this SNAFU of hiring someone other than the person who interviewed, without forcing people through webcam processes. Maybe IBM could do the same.
  - pmiller2 8y ago
    > ... Amazon.... Eh, according to one interviewee, they did this as recently as last year [0]. They certainly did it 2 years ago [1]. [0]: https://www.teamblind.com/article/Amazon-online-test-qtKOvsuR https://www.teamblind.com/article/Amazon-online-test-qtKOvsu... [1]: https://qz.com/859486/the-ridiculously-invasive-virtual-interview-process-applicants-are-subjected-to-at-amazon/ https://qz.com/859486/the-ridiculously-invasive-virtual-inte...
    - dunpeal 8y ago
      Fair point. Several of my friends went through their process recently and had no webcam component, but apparently they do this in some cases. Not something I would agree with.
  - kamaal 8y ago
    >>Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and hundreds of other companies hire thousands of candidates every year. Interviews in those companies are far more brutal, go upto typically 8 - 9 rounds, with an additional bar raiser round. And its a straight reject even if a single person from the panel gives a bad feedback, regardless how amazingly you have aced all the other rounds. By any measure that IBM interview is a walk in the park.
  - greedo 8y ago
    Video interviews are becoming quite common.

greedo 8y ago

We had an Oracle position that needed to be filled. Headhunter supplied a candidate, we did a phone interview, then an in person interview. Not very technical from what I understand, just Oracle/DBA basics. He starts at our secondary location, and seems to struggle. Simple tasks don't get accomplished quickly, and more complex jobs are incomplete. A few weeks go by, and our DBA manager visits the location, and realizes that the DBA is a completely different person than the one interviewed. Same ethnicity, but different person. He had apparently hired the interviewee to perform during the hiring process. Took us over a month to get rid of him; it was hard to prove that he had acted fraudulently, and the wheels of justice grind slowly. Between actual costs incurred and opportunity costs, it was a royal PITA. Weeding out these posers can be a problem. Again, his first step of the process doesn't seem arduous at all. Inconvenient and possibly annoying? Sure. But arduous is the incorrect word choice. When I was starting out, I had to interview at a headhunting company 2x. Then 2x interviews with the company I ended up at. I would have loved to be put up at a nice hotel during that process instead of having to drive all over meeting people. IBM is clearly responding to fraudulent interviews, plus signaling two things; that they have enough applicants to impose silly video interview protocols, and that once past the "technical" interview, it's all about schmoozing and politics. These signals tell you a lot about a company.

dunpeal 8y ago
I'm not really sure what you're arguing. That the step with him posing in front of a webcam to answer questions is common in the industry? It's not. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and hundreds of other companies hire thousands of candidates every year. Somehow they manage to avoid this SNAFU of hiring someone other than the person who interviewed, without forcing people through webcam processes. Maybe IBM could do the same.
- pmiller2 8y ago
  > ... Amazon.... Eh, according to one interviewee, they did this as recently as last year [0]. They certainly did it 2 years ago [1]. [0]: https://www.teamblind.com/article/Amazon-online-test-qtKOvsuR https://www.teamblind.com/article/Amazon-online-test-qtKOvsu... [1]: https://qz.com/859486/the-ridiculously-invasive-virtual-interview-process-applicants-are-subjected-to-at-amazon/ https://qz.com/859486/the-ridiculously-invasive-virtual-inte...
  - dunpeal 8y ago
    Fair point. Several of my friends went through their process recently and had no webcam component, but apparently they do this in some cases. Not something I would agree with.
- kamaal 8y ago
  >>Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and hundreds of other companies hire thousands of candidates every year. Interviews in those companies are far more brutal, go upto typically 8 - 9 rounds, with an additional bar raiser round. And its a straight reject even if a single person from the panel gives a bad feedback, regardless how amazingly you have aced all the other rounds. By any measure that IBM interview is a walk in the park.
- greedo 8y ago
  Video interviews are becoming quite common.