3 ms·
> refuses to do so in a social setting (i.e. an interview). Interviews are very different from working together collaboratively. They're very different from pr
by corrral 4y ago
> refuses to do so in a social setting (i.e. an interview).
Interviews are very different from working together collaboratively. They're very different from presenting work to or working with a client or stakeholder, too, and even very different from a sales presentation. The space of things that might come up is effectively unbound, how you're being judged is wildly uncertain, you are being judged, and you know almost nothing about the people you're "working with". As practiced in software, they're closer to being called in to give a thesis defense without knowing in advance which thesis you'll be defending—and also everyone in the room is a stranger, and also you have no clue which aspects of your performance are being judged or by what criteria, and even know for a fact that some of the people conducting these have completely opposite opinions about which behaviors are desirable and which are "red flags".
- twodave 4y agoI don’t think based on what I’m reading here that this is a criticism of coding during interviews so much as it is a criticism of candidate-hostile atmospheres in general. I’d also point out that social interactions are predicated on judging each other, and that this is healthy. It’s also not all one-sided. As an interviewee I choose to approach interviews as a process of satisfying my own curiosity and the curiosity of the potential employer about our viability as partners. That process doesn’t have to be a negative experience, and I don’t think a code screen or brain teaser really contributes directly to whether it is or not.