3 ms·
Interviewing should normally have two results: the candidate was able to demonstrate the appropriate skills, or the candidate was not. Not being able to demonst
by CobrastanJorji 6y ago
Interviewing should normally have two results: the candidate was able to demonstrate the appropriate skills, or the candidate was not. Not being able to demonstrate the right skills in the interview does not mean that the candidate is a bad programmer or even a bad fit for the job. It just means that I was not able to verify their bona fides in that hour.
That's the difference between "that interview didn't go well" and "you are a bad programmer." One's a major blow to self confidence, and the other's a bummer. It's also a helpful mindset shift for both the interviewer and the interviewee: both of us are working together to achieve the goal of proving your capabilities. My job is to give you as many opportunities as possible to do so.
- blub 6y agoWhy do you think that whenever we discuss interviews on HN, there's several highly upvoted comments complaining about how many incompetent people show up for interviews and how this basically makes coding interviews necessary? I think it's because most interviewers consider people that failed their interview bad programmers.
- closeparen 6y agoTrying to be charitable, I think that is about people failing FizzBuzz not LC Hard.