6 ms·
The problem being that when you muck up the interview, you get outed as a quack to someone you know.
by xlbuttplug2 3y ago
The problem being that when you muck up the interview, you get outed as a quack to someone you know.
- jpadkins 3y agoflopping interview != quack Everyone knows that interviews have high false negative rates (depending on your hiring criteria). You have to mentally guard yourself that interviews are not a complete judgement of you; they are at best a small pinhole view into your capabilities.
- bdcravens 3y agoEarly in my career I was an ace at learning just enough to talk the talk in an interview (I was playing the risky game that I'd have the chops to learn the skills when I needed them, which thankfully I always did)
- disgruntledphd2 3y agoI had a boss who was incredibly good at this strategy. She would take the time between the interview and job start to learn what she needed to know.
- WarOnPrivacy 3y ago> The problem being that when you muck up the interview, you get outed as a quack to someone you know. The downvotes you got were undeserved. For most job markets: If an ideal candidate is interview-disabled, their odds of being hired are dismal.
- a_t48 3y agoFor me personally - if I refer someone and they mess up the interview, I wouldn't take it as them being a "quack". If I referred someone it's likely I thought they could do the job fine, it's just that they didn't do a great job convincing my coworkers - and that's okay.