4 ms·
If I'm understanding this correctly, this is based largely on the results of mock interviews. The author says that interviewing.io "has hosted and collected fe
by skwirl 4y ago
If I'm understanding this correctly, this is based largely on the results of mock interviews. The author says that interviewing.io "has hosted and collected feedback from over 100K technical interviews, split between mock interviews and real ones" but does not say how many (or if any) of the interviews these conclusions were based on were from mock interviews. My understanding is that interviewing.io is largely for mock interviewing, although some interviewers may funnel you in to their real hiring pipeline if they like your mock interview.
I think mock interviews are great, but do we have any solid data on how well the "advance to next round" flag for a mock interview correlates to advancing to the next round in a real interview?
If I'm conducting a real interview, I'm going to be thinking about what it would be like to work with this candidate on a daily basis (or at least have them somewhere in my organization). I would think I would be more concerned about communication skills in a real interview, even if it's unconscious. With a mock interview, I'm in no danger of working with this person. I can be focused completely on their technical solution without thinking at all about what it would be like to work with this person day to day.
- BiteCode_dev 4y agoNot to mention remote interviews, and with a result solely based on the company rating about perceived communication performances. This has pretty much the equivalent scientific value of a twitter poll.
- zamfi 4y agoSure, if a Twitter poll were part of your hiring decision.
- BiteCode_dev 4y agoNot even that, since it's just a feedback about how people perceived communication. But we know the brain is terrible at assessing its own decision process. The hiring party could very well have not like the person, or be attracked sexually to the person, and felt that it was all about communication. Post decision star rating is junk science.
- zamfi 4y agoI can't speak to which data they used for this particular evaluation, but interviewing.io also hosts many companies' first phone screens -- it's not just that "some interviewers may funnel you in to their real hiring pipeline", for some companies interviewing.io is the start of their real hiring pipeline. From what I understand, they do a lot of calibration to make sure the "advance to next round" flag correlates with their clients' version of that flag. All that said, the interviewers they work with are all also interviewers are FANGs and similar -- the likelihood of working with someone you interview at a company with 10000s of employees is...about as low as for a mock interview. You've definitely identified a possible confound, but I think the i.io team is aware of it and does a lot of mitigation (for many reasons, not just for this one report).