5 ms·

Job descriptions shouldnt be a complicated puzzle then. I once interviewed at a company and mid-interview I could see I was struggling, interviewers were super

Job descriptions shouldnt be a complicated puzzle then. I once interviewed at a company and mid-interview I could see I was struggling, interviewers were super nice though helped me solve the problem they gave. No wonder i didnt get the job, but rejection email said they thought I am a good engineer. I replied if they can tell me where I can improve. They did so politely. Few months down the road, I improved and applied again. I got the job

flappyeagle 4y ago
You were always qualified and they shouldn’t have rejected you the first time. This is an example of what not to do on the hiring managers part.
- faraaz98 4y ago
  No I was very unprepared, even I could tell
  - flappyeagle 4y ago
    As an interviewer, my job isn't to judge whether a candidate is prepared. My job is to judge whether they can do the job. If the interviewer says "I think you're a good engineer", the next sentence should be "we would like to make you an offer". If I could hire people by reading their mind and understanding their ability, without requiring an ounce of preparation, I would do that.
- munchbunny 4y ago
  I disagree that the second sentence follows from the first. Interviewing is a game of incomplete information, and you won’t find consensus among programmers for how they would rather be interviewed. It’s entirely possible that the candidate was just off their game that day, or they weren’t “warmed up”. I get noticeably better at interviewing after the first few. It happens, but the interviewer has the information they got, and it’s not possible to totally control for that kind of variance. What hiring managers should be actively minimizing, that most hiring managers I’ve seen do not, is variance that their interview process introduces by, for example, not standardizing and training their interviewers.
aartav 4y ago
I don't this the job description is the complicated puzzle - its people that are the complex puzzle. Even with the most perfectly defined job description, you might have many candidates who "fit" that description, so you have to weigh a lot of other factors which run a huge gamut. Many, many times I've had multiple candidates that are more-or-less the same in terms of experience, technical competence, ability to learn, get shit done, etc - so you start looking at other factors and it can get down to things like communication, personal hygiene, general awkwardness, etc.

flappyeagle 4y ago

You were always qualified and they shouldn’t have rejected you the first time. This is an example of what not to do on the hiring managers part.

faraaz98 4y ago
No I was very unprepared, even I could tell
- flappyeagle 4y ago
  As an interviewer, my job isn't to judge whether a candidate is prepared. My job is to judge whether they can do the job. If the interviewer says "I think you're a good engineer", the next sentence should be "we would like to make you an offer". If I could hire people by reading their mind and understanding their ability, without requiring an ounce of preparation, I would do that.
munchbunny 4y ago
I disagree that the second sentence follows from the first. Interviewing is a game of incomplete information, and you won’t find consensus among programmers for how they would rather be interviewed. It’s entirely possible that the candidate was just off their game that day, or they weren’t “warmed up”. I get noticeably better at interviewing after the first few. It happens, but the interviewer has the information they got, and it’s not possible to totally control for that kind of variance. What hiring managers should be actively minimizing, that most hiring managers I’ve seen do not, is variance that their interview process introduces by, for example, not standardizing and training their interviewers.

aartav 4y ago

I don't this the job description is the complicated puzzle - its people that are the complex puzzle. Even with the most perfectly defined job description, you might have many candidates who "fit" that description, so you have to weigh a lot of other factors which run a huge gamut. Many, many times I've had multiple candidates that are more-or-less the same in terms of experience, technical competence, ability to learn, get shit done, etc - so you start looking at other factors and it can get down to things like communication, personal hygiene, general awkwardness, etc.