> So basically what you're testing your interviewees for is how much they have prepared for interviewing with you (they're happy because they were preparing for

> So basically what you're testing your interviewees for is how much they have prepared for interviewing with you (they're happy because they were preparing for your questioning/you're happy because they made the right answers). The question is whether their ability at being interviewed correlates with their ability to excuse themselves from doing the job. No. All I'm asking them is to come up with a single interesting project within the last three years that they did, be it professional or even a fun one and have some conversation over it. If they didn't do any remotely interesting work or can't talk about it at a high level, how could I possibly expect them to come up with own ideas or communicate about them in the future? Other than that, you'd be extremely surprised at how little candidates actually prepare on average, even if I tell them in advance exactly what happens in the interview and what I'll be looking for (which I do). So I do respect your points, but I don't really get them. You may be right. I'm getting the results I want and my teams are happy and productive. Here's a mail from an interviewee last week: > Thank you so much for the response! I would have loved to work with you guys, but I do understand. The experience was very helpful to me anyways, [...] Thanks again, and maybe we will work together in the future!