3 ms·

I recently had an interview with a company that involved 6 people interviewing me serially. That sort of thing is grueling in the best of cases. But this one we

I recently had an interview with a company that involved 6 people interviewing me serially. That sort of thing is grueling in the best of cases. But this one went south with the third interviewer. He seemed to me be someone with something like Aspergers syndrome. He talked in a monotone, fidgeted constantly and was rocking back and forth. While I have no problem working with anyone technically competent, this person was clearly not capable of running an interview. He asked a technical question to which I answered a more or less standard response. He told me I was wrong. Being a bit stunned (it wasn't a hard question), I asked him what he meant. He gave me a reply that was quite incorrect. Now, in a normal interview situation if this occurs, I see it as an opportunity to have a conversation. I can explain my point and the interviewer can respond. You can find out a lot about an organization with this kind of interaction. But in this case, the interviewer just kept saying I was wrong and never responded to my questions or gave an explanation why his answer's were correct except to say that they were. It was very troubling. I didn't get the job. This might have been because of this interview directly but it certainly was at least partially the cause since I really didn't have much enthusiasm for the next 3 interviews. A company that would allow someone with social interaction issues run an interview is very problematic. I can't imagine who could have done well in that series of interviews given the circumstances.

GFischer 15y ago
Why do you think someone with Asperger's shouldn't conduct an interview? I can see talking in a monotone and fidgeting as an annoyance, but was it show-stopping? The refusal to answer why your response was (in his opinion) wrong is definitely a problem. I'm worried about this because I've been unofficially diagnosed with Asperger's (I believe I'm not, but I'm definitely borderline / close) and I intend to run a company. I do fidget and miss some clues, but I'd have answered if someone asked me why I believed an answer is wrong. Edit: I'm sorry if I came across in such a way to merit a downvote. I was genuinely interested in the answer. I'd also appreciate an explanation of what sounded "wrong" in my post.
- thoughtsimple 15y ago
  Sorry, I may not have been clear in my description. I didn't notice much of anything when he came in. It was after the interview started and he asked this question that he thought I answered incorrectly that the trouble started. That's when I started noticing the somewhat odd mannerisms and the fact that I couldn't get a technical discussion about the question started. Like I said, I'm used to working with all types of developers. I usually get along well with my colleagues. I have no trouble with any kinds of quirks--I probably have some myself. The issue was that this person was not capable of running an interview. He couldn't deal at all with a minor conflict on a technical question. This kind of thing can lead to a company not getting good results from the recruiting process which is what the OP is about.
  - GFischer 15y ago
    Ok, thanks for your reply :)
- jstraszheim 15y ago
  My first programming job was for a boss who (we believe) had Asperger's. He was great and the job was great. I mean, he was a bit weird. But so what. Anyway, it's a serious condition, but beneath it is a real person who may be a great person. Or not. Just like everybody else. I think it's more likely that the guy got interviewed by an anti-social jerk.
ay 15y ago
"...6 people interviewing me serially. That sort of thing is grueling..." This sort of thing is a standard process in many companies - precisely to avoid the single-person bias mentioned in other post. Besides, the interviewers (in the properly organized case) are usually one's future coworkers - and if you did not like them maybe working there would not have been a good idea for you to begin with. "...didn't have much enthusiasm for the next 3 interviews..." - this is your mistake. You should have treated them totally indepentently, and possibly asked the other interviewers about the incorrect question. Chances are they'd corrected that guy during the offline discussion. "A company that would allow someone with social interaction issues run an interview is very problematic." - not at all. They gave that person a chance to learn. They gave you a chance to preview your future coworkers and make a decision. I think multi-person interviews are a critical part of getting a good atmosphere in the team.
- thoughtsimple 15y ago
  Well I guess if your goal is to have me not take the job but to have a "co-worker" learn then they accomplished their goal. If it wasn't that, then having a bad interviewer on his own was a complete waste of my time and of the other 5 people who I interviewed with that day.
  - ay 15y ago
    I only wanted to speculate about possible reasons. Maybe there was something else - does not matter, really. On the other hand, ditching your rounds with the subsequent interviewers just because you became emotional about one of them does materially decrease your chances to get a job - instead of one "bad interview" round feedback you got that one plus all the subsequent ones. This is a sub-optimal strategy. And, arguably, a waste of both your time and the remaining interviewers'.
karmajunkie 15y ago
perhaps he was working from #7 on joel's interview questions: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000073.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000073.html
- thoughtsimple 15y ago
  That's interesting because I think the interviewer was unintentionally doing this. But the problem was that I couldn't have a conversation with him. He just kept on telling me I was wrong with no discussion. I didn't give in. He never changed his answer or tone. When I say monotone, I'm not kidding. So if he was trying to use Joel's technique, shouldn't he have at least engaged in a conversation? If he was doing it, he was doing it very badly. I'm pretty persuasive when it comes to technical issues. I'm frequently wrong and lose many a battle but I win them too at least as often as I lose. I can tell you I wasn't getting any feedback that he was interested in resolving the conflict. Just that he wanted me to acknowledge that he was right. He wasn't. If the goal was to challenge me, it backfired. After this incident I had little interest in continuing the interview. It turned me off on the company pretty conclusively. And then I was angry because I felt my time had been wasted. Not a good outcome for me or them.
gherlein 15y ago
Have you considered that maybe him telling you that you were wrong was a ruse to see how you handled disagreements? I use this technique sometimes myself.
- thoughtsimple 15y ago
  Of course, it was my first instinct. It became clear quite quickly that this wasn't the case. He believed he was correct and was uninterested in having a conversation.

GFischer 15y ago

Why do you think someone with Asperger's shouldn't conduct an interview? I can see talking in a monotone and fidgeting as an annoyance, but was it show-stopping? The refusal to answer why your response was (in his opinion) wrong is definitely a problem. I'm worried about this because I've been unofficially diagnosed with Asperger's (I believe I'm not, but I'm definitely borderline / close) and I intend to run a company. I do fidget and miss some clues, but I'd have answered if someone asked me why I believed an answer is wrong. Edit: I'm sorry if I came across in such a way to merit a downvote. I was genuinely interested in the answer. I'd also appreciate an explanation of what sounded "wrong" in my post.

thoughtsimple 15y ago
Sorry, I may not have been clear in my description. I didn't notice much of anything when he came in. It was after the interview started and he asked this question that he thought I answered incorrectly that the trouble started. That's when I started noticing the somewhat odd mannerisms and the fact that I couldn't get a technical discussion about the question started. Like I said, I'm used to working with all types of developers. I usually get along well with my colleagues. I have no trouble with any kinds of quirks--I probably have some myself. The issue was that this person was not capable of running an interview. He couldn't deal at all with a minor conflict on a technical question. This kind of thing can lead to a company not getting good results from the recruiting process which is what the OP is about.
- GFischer 15y ago
  Ok, thanks for your reply :)
jstraszheim 15y ago
My first programming job was for a boss who (we believe) had Asperger's. He was great and the job was great. I mean, he was a bit weird. But so what. Anyway, it's a serious condition, but beneath it is a real person who may be a great person. Or not. Just like everybody else. I think it's more likely that the guy got interviewed by an anti-social jerk.

ay 15y ago

"...6 people interviewing me serially. That sort of thing is grueling..." This sort of thing is a standard process in many companies - precisely to avoid the single-person bias mentioned in other post. Besides, the interviewers (in the properly organized case) are usually one's future coworkers - and if you did not like them maybe working there would not have been a good idea for you to begin with. "...didn't have much enthusiasm for the next 3 interviews..." - this is your mistake. You should have treated them totally indepentently, and possibly asked the other interviewers about the incorrect question. Chances are they'd corrected that guy during the offline discussion. "A company that would allow someone with social interaction issues run an interview is very problematic." - not at all. They gave that person a chance to learn. They gave you a chance to preview your future coworkers and make a decision. I think multi-person interviews are a critical part of getting a good atmosphere in the team.

thoughtsimple 15y ago
Well I guess if your goal is to have me not take the job but to have a "co-worker" learn then they accomplished their goal. If it wasn't that, then having a bad interviewer on his own was a complete waste of my time and of the other 5 people who I interviewed with that day.
- ay 15y ago
  I only wanted to speculate about possible reasons. Maybe there was something else - does not matter, really. On the other hand, ditching your rounds with the subsequent interviewers just because you became emotional about one of them does materially decrease your chances to get a job - instead of one "bad interview" round feedback you got that one plus all the subsequent ones. This is a sub-optimal strategy. And, arguably, a waste of both your time and the remaining interviewers'.

karmajunkie 15y ago

perhaps he was working from #7 on joel's interview questions: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000073.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000073.html

thoughtsimple 15y ago
That's interesting because I think the interviewer was unintentionally doing this. But the problem was that I couldn't have a conversation with him. He just kept on telling me I was wrong with no discussion. I didn't give in. He never changed his answer or tone. When I say monotone, I'm not kidding. So if he was trying to use Joel's technique, shouldn't he have at least engaged in a conversation? If he was doing it, he was doing it very badly. I'm pretty persuasive when it comes to technical issues. I'm frequently wrong and lose many a battle but I win them too at least as often as I lose. I can tell you I wasn't getting any feedback that he was interested in resolving the conflict. Just that he wanted me to acknowledge that he was right. He wasn't. If the goal was to challenge me, it backfired. After this incident I had little interest in continuing the interview. It turned me off on the company pretty conclusively. And then I was angry because I felt my time had been wasted. Not a good outcome for me or them.

gherlein 15y ago

Have you considered that maybe him telling you that you were wrong was a ruse to see how you handled disagreements? I use this technique sometimes myself.

thoughtsimple 15y ago
Of course, it was my first instinct. It became clear quite quickly that this wasn't the case. He believed he was correct and was uninterested in having a conversation.