4 ms·

>All you have to do to be indistinguishable from someone who knows what they are talking about in two interviews is to say the things that someone who knows wha

>All you have to do to be indistinguishable from someone who knows what they are talking about in two interviews is to say the things that someone who knows what they are talking about would say, in the way that they would say them. Sounds like a supervillain or something. Maybe you're asking the wrong questions or maybe I have a knack for it, but the only thing I can't detect is motivation, which is probably more important than current ability. One of my worst hires was a guy who could answer all the trivia; sharp as a tack, but didn't have the discipline to do the work. He was always slacking and I couldn't count on him to get things done, even with loose deadlines. I mean most hiring managers don't bother calling references either. That yields a lot of insight; those references were hand picked by the candidate. Maybe call their last employer, even if it wasn't listed as a reference. One of my first questions is, "Tell me about your favorite project and why." If they answer in a sentence or two, even when prodded or show little or no enthusiasm, it's a pass. You have to like the work to be good at it. Ask some follow up questions to their answer. A phony can only go so deep. Second question is, "Tell me about your least favorite project and why."

awb 5y ago
Yeah, those are two great questions! > the only thing I can't detect is motivation Interesting! I feel highly attuned to that, but less confident in some other areas that sounds easier for you to evaluate. Funny how that works.
kragen 5y ago
Maybe you're just better at interviewing people than I am. (That sounds sarcastic, but it's not.) I'll try to take your advice to heart if I'm interviewing someone for a job in the future. It's true that if someone has memorized the details of a "least favorite project" from dailywtf.com, or a "favorite project" from some other dev blog, they won't be able to go very deep into it; and if they don't have at least deep declarative knowledge about the technologies involved they won't be able to invent anything plausible either. Deep declarative knowledge, though, is still very different from debugging ability or the ability to find simple solutions to complex problems. The enthusiasm thing is discussed pretty often in all kinds of job interview advice contexts, not just programming. I think many people make an effort to project enthusiasm in that situation, and in some other social situations like dating. Hopefully you're filtering for real enthusiasm instead of ability to emote, but realistically it's probably a combination.
- Clubber 5y ago
  >Deep declarative knowledge, though, is still very different from debugging ability 90% of debugging is reading (and understanding) whatever exception was thrown. I can't count the times when a really good dev asks me for help and I ask, "well what does the error say?" Once they read it, they're like, "never mind." If reading/understanding the error doesn't work, it really requires pretty deep knowledge of the application architecture and possibly auxiliary systems and infrastructure to figure it out. If your application is custom, then they can't have that knowledge coming in and can only get it with OJT. That extra 10% is really the hard part, but you really only need one or two people who can cover the whole team on that extra 10%, and the process will help improve the people who aren't as good at it. >or the ability to find simple solutions to complex problems. That's where the genius really is. Reading the first few chapters of Donald Knuth's first volume really blew my mind. Probably won't be able to discover that talent in any interview process. >Hopefully you're filtering for real enthusiasm instead of ability to emote, but realistically it's probably a combination. Yes, it's just a piece of the puzzle. Lack of enthusiasm is more a red flag than putting a lot of weight in enthusiasm itself. Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that’s creativity. -Charles Mingus

awb 5y ago

Yeah, those are two great questions! > the only thing I can't detect is motivation Interesting! I feel highly attuned to that, but less confident in some other areas that sounds easier for you to evaluate. Funny how that works.

kragen 5y ago

Maybe you're just better at interviewing people than I am. (That sounds sarcastic, but it's not.) I'll try to take your advice to heart if I'm interviewing someone for a job in the future. It's true that if someone has memorized the details of a "least favorite project" from dailywtf.com, or a "favorite project" from some other dev blog, they won't be able to go very deep into it; and if they don't have at least deep declarative knowledge about the technologies involved they won't be able to invent anything plausible either. Deep declarative knowledge, though, is still very different from debugging ability or the ability to find simple solutions to complex problems. The enthusiasm thing is discussed pretty often in all kinds of job interview advice contexts, not just programming. I think many people make an effort to project enthusiasm in that situation, and in some other social situations like dating. Hopefully you're filtering for real enthusiasm instead of ability to emote, but realistically it's probably a combination.

Clubber 5y ago
>Deep declarative knowledge, though, is still very different from debugging ability 90% of debugging is reading (and understanding) whatever exception was thrown. I can't count the times when a really good dev asks me for help and I ask, "well what does the error say?" Once they read it, they're like, "never mind." If reading/understanding the error doesn't work, it really requires pretty deep knowledge of the application architecture and possibly auxiliary systems and infrastructure to figure it out. If your application is custom, then they can't have that knowledge coming in and can only get it with OJT. That extra 10% is really the hard part, but you really only need one or two people who can cover the whole team on that extra 10%, and the process will help improve the people who aren't as good at it. >or the ability to find simple solutions to complex problems. That's where the genius really is. Reading the first few chapters of Donald Knuth's first volume really blew my mind. Probably won't be able to discover that talent in any interview process. >Hopefully you're filtering for real enthusiasm instead of ability to emote, but realistically it's probably a combination. Yes, it's just a piece of the puzzle. Lack of enthusiasm is more a red flag than putting a lot of weight in enthusiasm itself. Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that’s creativity. -Charles Mingus