3 ms·
The fraction of engineers at Google to which these conditions apply is tiny. It's absolutely absurd to interview based on some fictitious need. The real reason
by sidlls 8y ago
The fraction of engineers at Google to which these conditions apply is tiny. It's absolutely absurd to interview based on some fictitious need. The real reason Google interviews the way they do is not because they need a high bar. Their interviews are structured to preserve the egos of the interviewers and because, like the gaming industry, they can simply due to the sheer number of applicants.
- mav3rick 8y ago"Their interviews are structured to preserve the egos of the interviewers " You just stereotyped about 100k people. You have no idea about how many people work to make the interview questions as interviewee friendly as possible. You may hate the company but don't judge the people without knowing them.
- mav3rick 8y agoGoogle's requirements also allow easy mobility between teams. If all I knew was one framework, I'd always have to prove myself again when I move teams. The hiring bar ensures that most candidates can adapt due to their strong CS base.
- sidlls 8y agoNo, these interview questions do not signal for that kind of adaptability. They're a signal that someone studied (crammed for a few weeks, often) a small slice of CS. They're a poor signal for the work engineers do there, or anywhere, in almost every case.
- mav3rick 8y agoPlease hire using frameworks knowledge for your company. More power to you.
- anongraddebt 8y agoEgo abounds everywhere. However, your point about applicant volume motivating the setting of a high bar for entry is spot on. This is happening throughout the corporate world. Too many candidates for too few high-paying and elite positions. My girlfriend works in finance and recently interviewed for a post-MBA position at (arguably) the top company for the work she does. She talked with other candidates, and discovered it was not uncommon to pay thousands of dollars on interview preparation (books, coaching sessions, etc.), and to spend, say, over 100 hours prepping in total... for interviews with a single firm... which you weren't even certain you'd be interviewing with. This trend is only accelerating. The less pessimistic stance is to just say this is a consequence of greater specialization. The less optimistic stance is to say we are seeing professionalization for the sake of professionalization. I'm not optimistic.