7 ms·

I don't think that's entirely fair to the candidates. I don't know your stance on Proctorio and I'm not going to air dirty laundry to an effective stranger. And

by bena 6y ago

I don't think that's entirely fair to the candidates. I don't know your stance on Proctorio and I'm not going to air dirty laundry to an effective stranger. And any company or hiring manager who tries to bait me into bad-mouthing a company I've worked at gets a red flag from me.

yhoneycomb 6y ago
Agreed. An employer could just as easily say they don’t want anyone who bad mouths their previous employers because it reflects poorly on them. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
- lostcolony 6y ago
  Only if the goal is simply "get a job, anywhere". If the interview is to mutually figure out if you should work for the company, there is no such thing as a damned if you do, damned if you don't; all it can be is a "they care about what I care about" or "I don't want to work there".
  - yhoneycomb 6y ago
    Being able to pick your job that way is a privilege, and it certainly isn’t granted to everyone in all fields
    - lostcolony 6y ago
      Hence my first statement. That said, the whole context was about a software company.
lostcolony 6y ago
Sure it is. My first job outta college was for a defense contractor. It's perfectly fair to ask me why I left, or even more pointedly, "how do you feel about working for a defense contractor?" It's not an invitation to badmouth, it IS an invitation to discuss the ethical concerns involved, and why you found it acceptable (even if it's just that it was a meal ticket until you found something you objected to less)
- crosvenir 6y ago
  Out of curiosity, how _do_ you feel about having worked for a defense contractor and, separately, working for one again? What tradeoffs have you experienced (good and bad) moving from defense to non-defense industry? I'm personally beginning to think there is a crossroads coming up for me and would value your perspectives if you have time to share. Thanks!
  - lostcolony 6y ago
    So this was about a decade ago and only a couple years of my life; I really wouldn't want to misrepresent my experience at the time as being reflective of what it's like now. So I'll just touch on the things that likely are the same now. The bidding process for defense contracts means a lot of Big Design Up Front, and an inability to change things easily once signed, means that though there are attempts at being agile, they likely involve only the technical delivery side (CI/CD pipelines, automated testing, etc), not the interaction with product and other stakeholders (no fail fast and pivot, real MVP, etc). I know there's been some attempts at moving in this direction, but I honestly can't see it happening, since it's innately at odds with the short term incentives that Congress has (and the Pentagon operates under). The place I worked at had decent perks, but nothing like Silicon Valley tech companies. We had a cafeteria and a Starbucks in the building, but neither was subsidized. Vending machine snacks, again, at cost. Pay and benefits were reasonably competitive for the area as best I could tell (but didn't look that much; when I was ready to move on I wanted different geography as well). General culture was fairly laid back; only the month or so before something was due did it feel crunchy, and then only for certain people. A lot of dead weight, but a lot of job security, especially for those who delivered. The projects could be interesting. I worked on a distributed data visualization system that got me exposed to the CAP theorem back in 2011ish, which helped set the trajectory of my career, though I didn't realize it at the time. I also encountered people who said, half jokingly, that their skills had stagnated to the point they weren't hireable elsewhere. I doubt that as true, but certainly at the time there was work on technical things that didn't translate outside of defense (but many of the skills did even if not the technology). In terms of would I go back to the defense industry? Probably not if I have a choice. While there are a lot of problems in public sector tech companies too, and many with the same issues as defense contractors, there are more of them, and the constraints placed on them tend not to feel as daunting or arbitrary as some of the ones placed on defense companies. Ultimately the impression I got was that defense companies tend to be very stable and predictable, and I just don't appreciate that as much as I appreciate being able to suggest changes and seek improvements. Approaching this the other way - stepping into my first public sector company, I got to appreciate being agile, actually working with stakeholders to understand and address their needs directly. I got to make technology choices with the team based on what would address the problem the best (and that we were interested in supporting) instead of being told what they were based on what the contract said. And I got to work on smaller more focused teams. Longer term, I've gotten better compensation I feel like (though haven't directly compared; is there more than just a ~15% bonus offered at defense companies now?), the feeling of a lot more things 'done', and the ability to change jobs (without having to change geographic locations) when I felt like I needed a change.
yowlingcat 6y ago
I'm not sure whether I can take this statement at its word. If that's the response when questioned about working at a company whose entire purpose is purportedly ethical, I would strongly reconsider your position. There are many corporate cultures where this kind of apathy and whatabout-ism would be considered a red flag. That would certainly be the case for any process I've run.
- bena 6y ago
  Let me put it this way, asking why you left an employer is fine. Expecting a certain answer for a subjective situation and rejecting an applicant because they didn't give you exactly that answer is not exactly a healthy behavior. I'm here for a job, not to play weird mind games.
  - mynameisvlad 6y ago
    Bingo. If you discard my resume because I refuse to badmouth a previous employer in an interview then that's just a sign that I'd probably rather not work for you. And as other people mentioned, especially in an interview where you're being intensely judged and have to give second thought to everything you say, I'm not about to give anything other than a neutral answer that's supposed to appease most people.
  - pessimizer 6y ago
    Then why ask? All job interviews are weird mind games. My assumption when I'm asked why I left my last employer is that they're looking to second-guess my other answers based on what I say, or checking to see if I'm a disagreeable person who is willing to badmouth somebody generous enough to employ me. This is just taking the latter in the opposite direction.
    - bena 6y ago
      There are plenty of reasons to move employers that doesn't involve saying that company you were working for is unethical. You could say that you've reached your ceiling and are looking for the next step up. That's a fair one. The company you are leaving may not be able to promote you. You're looking to work on new projects and your current company is just maintaining and/or adding features. That's also fair. > checking to see if I'm a disagreeable person who is willing to badmouth somebody generous enough to employ me. Ah, but you see, the guy I originally replied to is checking to see if you're willing to badmouth companies he dislikes. And if you don't, he will dismiss your application. It's an unspoken rule you can violate without ever knowing you're in violation of it and has a huge affect on the outcome of the scenario. No reasonable interviewer is going to put you in the position of having to cast aspersions on a previous employer. That's a minefield for all sorts of reasons.
driverdan 6y ago
There's a difference between bad-mouthing your employer and discussing ethical issues that are public knowledge.

by bena 6y ago

yhoneycomb 6y ago

Agreed. An employer could just as easily say they don’t want anyone who bad mouths their previous employers because it reflects poorly on them. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

lostcolony 6y ago
Only if the goal is simply "get a job, anywhere". If the interview is to mutually figure out if you should work for the company, there is no such thing as a damned if you do, damned if you don't; all it can be is a "they care about what I care about" or "I don't want to work there".
- yhoneycomb 6y ago
  Being able to pick your job that way is a privilege, and it certainly isn’t granted to everyone in all fields
  - lostcolony 6y ago
    Hence my first statement. That said, the whole context was about a software company.

lostcolony 6y ago

Sure it is. My first job outta college was for a defense contractor. It's perfectly fair to ask me why I left, or even more pointedly, "how do you feel about working for a defense contractor?" It's not an invitation to badmouth, it IS an invitation to discuss the ethical concerns involved, and why you found it acceptable (even if it's just that it was a meal ticket until you found something you objected to less)

crosvenir 6y ago
Out of curiosity, how _do_ you feel about having worked for a defense contractor and, separately, working for one again? What tradeoffs have you experienced (good and bad) moving from defense to non-defense industry? I'm personally beginning to think there is a crossroads coming up for me and would value your perspectives if you have time to share. Thanks!
- lostcolony 6y ago
  So this was about a decade ago and only a couple years of my life; I really wouldn't want to misrepresent my experience at the time as being reflective of what it's like now. So I'll just touch on the things that likely are the same now. The bidding process for defense contracts means a lot of Big Design Up Front, and an inability to change things easily once signed, means that though there are attempts at being agile, they likely involve only the technical delivery side (CI/CD pipelines, automated testing, etc), not the interaction with product and other stakeholders (no fail fast and pivot, real MVP, etc). I know there's been some attempts at moving in this direction, but I honestly can't see it happening, since it's innately at odds with the short term incentives that Congress has (and the Pentagon operates under). The place I worked at had decent perks, but nothing like Silicon Valley tech companies. We had a cafeteria and a Starbucks in the building, but neither was subsidized. Vending machine snacks, again, at cost. Pay and benefits were reasonably competitive for the area as best I could tell (but didn't look that much; when I was ready to move on I wanted different geography as well). General culture was fairly laid back; only the month or so before something was due did it feel crunchy, and then only for certain people. A lot of dead weight, but a lot of job security, especially for those who delivered. The projects could be interesting. I worked on a distributed data visualization system that got me exposed to the CAP theorem back in 2011ish, which helped set the trajectory of my career, though I didn't realize it at the time. I also encountered people who said, half jokingly, that their skills had stagnated to the point they weren't hireable elsewhere. I doubt that as true, but certainly at the time there was work on technical things that didn't translate outside of defense (but many of the skills did even if not the technology). In terms of would I go back to the defense industry? Probably not if I have a choice. While there are a lot of problems in public sector tech companies too, and many with the same issues as defense contractors, there are more of them, and the constraints placed on them tend not to feel as daunting or arbitrary as some of the ones placed on defense companies. Ultimately the impression I got was that defense companies tend to be very stable and predictable, and I just don't appreciate that as much as I appreciate being able to suggest changes and seek improvements. Approaching this the other way - stepping into my first public sector company, I got to appreciate being agile, actually working with stakeholders to understand and address their needs directly. I got to make technology choices with the team based on what would address the problem the best (and that we were interested in supporting) instead of being told what they were based on what the contract said. And I got to work on smaller more focused teams. Longer term, I've gotten better compensation I feel like (though haven't directly compared; is there more than just a ~15% bonus offered at defense companies now?), the feeling of a lot more things 'done', and the ability to change jobs (without having to change geographic locations) when I felt like I needed a change.

yowlingcat 6y ago

I'm not sure whether I can take this statement at its word. If that's the response when questioned about working at a company whose entire purpose is purportedly ethical, I would strongly reconsider your position. There are many corporate cultures where this kind of apathy and whatabout-ism would be considered a red flag. That would certainly be the case for any process I've run.

bena 6y ago
Let me put it this way, asking why you left an employer is fine. Expecting a certain answer for a subjective situation and rejecting an applicant because they didn't give you exactly that answer is not exactly a healthy behavior. I'm here for a job, not to play weird mind games.
- mynameisvlad 6y ago
  Bingo. If you discard my resume because I refuse to badmouth a previous employer in an interview then that's just a sign that I'd probably rather not work for you. And as other people mentioned, especially in an interview where you're being intensely judged and have to give second thought to everything you say, I'm not about to give anything other than a neutral answer that's supposed to appease most people.
- pessimizer 6y ago
  Then why ask? All job interviews are weird mind games. My assumption when I'm asked why I left my last employer is that they're looking to second-guess my other answers based on what I say, or checking to see if I'm a disagreeable person who is willing to badmouth somebody generous enough to employ me. This is just taking the latter in the opposite direction.
  - bena 6y ago
    There are plenty of reasons to move employers that doesn't involve saying that company you were working for is unethical. You could say that you've reached your ceiling and are looking for the next step up. That's a fair one. The company you are leaving may not be able to promote you. You're looking to work on new projects and your current company is just maintaining and/or adding features. That's also fair. > checking to see if I'm a disagreeable person who is willing to badmouth somebody generous enough to employ me. Ah, but you see, the guy I originally replied to is checking to see if you're willing to badmouth companies he dislikes. And if you don't, he will dismiss your application. It's an unspoken rule you can violate without ever knowing you're in violation of it and has a huge affect on the outcome of the scenario. No reasonable interviewer is going to put you in the position of having to cast aspersions on a previous employer. That's a minefield for all sorts of reasons.

driverdan 6y ago

There's a difference between bad-mouthing your employer and discussing ethical issues that are public knowledge.