4 ms·

First they say they don't like tricky questions, and then goes on to admit the "spec" is ambiguous. True, candidates are permitted to ask questions, but perhaps

First they say they don't like tricky questions, and then goes on to admit the "spec" is ambiguous. True, candidates are permitted to ask questions, but perhaps they are trusting of the interviewer and expect the question to be actionable as is? Or just the same, the candidates don't trust the interviewer and don't ask questions because they fear that'll result in a penalty? If you come from an environment where questions aren't rewarded - and there are plenty of those - then silence is likely. Finally, it's worth mentioning, while the question + answer might correlate well with the hiring decision there's no mention to how well it predicts future performance. That said, there's a survivor bias at play so using it against performance might be iffy.

acheron 3y ago
Ugh yes, the interviewers who give ambiguous questions and expect you to read their mind are the worst. What’s the old xkcd: “communicating poorly then acting smug when you’re misunderstood is not cleverness.”
- klodolph 3y ago
  The skill under test is for that part is “can solve ambiguous problems”, and what you want to see is that the candidate is able to recognize that a problem is ambiguous. I think the hard part is recognizing that a problem is ambiguous. Telling someone that a problem is ambiguous kind of defeats the point. IMO, it’s not about reading someone’s mind, but recognizing that there are multiple interpretations to what somebody has SAID. That seems less like a mind-reading technique and more like, you know, a communication skill. I have gotten lots of ambiguous problems during my career, it seems only fair to have them appear during an interview.
- philwelch 3y ago
  He’s not expecting you to read his mind; he’s expecting you to notice the ambiguity and ask a clarifying question.
  - chiefalchemist 3y ago
    The interviewer is expecting the interviewer to violate standard interview protocol? While the interviewee is perhaps desperate for a job? And the interviewer is - in his/her mind - thumping their chest about what a great and experienced interviewer they are? I can't see how that's a success-minded plan for anyone involved.
    - gpderetta 3y ago
      Asking questions is a protocol violation???? What kind of interviews are you subjecting yourself to?
      - chiefalchemist 3y ago
        Apparently, you'd be surprised (the kind of crap interviewing experiences there are). That aside, the candidate definitely has to err to the side of caution. There's also typically a time limit, yes? That's protocol.
two_handfuls 3y ago
I think what the author meant is that they dislike questions that require too specialized knowledge, so once you know the trick the question is easy to answer, but whether the candidate knows that particular trick is not otherwise correlated with candidate skill.
sneed_chucker 3y ago
Frankly, I don't want to hire people who are too timid to ask a simple clarifying question in an interview. A big part of this job is dealing with ambiguity and communication. If you feel the requirements of your task aren't clear, then go to the person who made the task and clarify them. What's the alternative, exactly? Staying silent and waiting? Wasting time implementing the wrong solution?
- davidw 3y ago
  Then make it clear that it's "real world" and that they can and should ask questions about aspects of it that they need more information on, rather than just hoping they do so.
  - redditor98654 3y ago
    Usually all interviewers will say “please take some time to consider the problem and ask any clarifying questions if you have any”. This is standard for all Amazon interviews. Source: Conducted 250+ interviews in Amazon.
    - davidw 3y ago
      That feels very formulaic, which is I guess par for the course for behemoth corporations. If it were me, I would try and frame it like "this is an attempt to be a bit more 'real-world' where we've received some initial direction on what the results are supposed to look like from management, but don't consider any of it set in stone and I'm happy to talk you through it as if we were working together...". IDK the exact verbiage, but something that gets people in that mindset without straight up telling them "this is meant to be ambiguous, wink wink".
      - redditor98654 3y ago
        Yeah, I made my comment concise but in a real interview I do say something similar.
- 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
davidw 3y ago
I agree with this... you're asked to do something and the interviewer is purposefully holding back information wanting you to come out and ask about it. That feels a bit tricky to me.
- chiefalchemist 3y ago
  It's certainly not transparency. I do agree, the real job would habe to deal with ambiguity. But this is the interview. The interviewee has a completely different mindset going in. "Playing games" to see how they respond...that's for the likes of the NSA, CIA, etc. "We can't find good candidates"? Nah. Your hiring process sucks. Get a mirror.
phanimahesh 3y ago
I have practically never seen a prd that did not have some ambiguity. I realised spotting ambiguity and asking questions is an essential and invaluable skill that needs to be selected for. One of my teams was very surprised that I rejected a prd for being too vague and put my foot down that it will not be picked up until specific questions are answered. They were, I would not say meek, but resigned to the inevitability of product managers pushing poorly thought PRDs and not having any say in the matter. I took my time training them to say no and spot ambiguities, and I like to think they have all become better developers and product managers for it. I always pick questions that have more than one obviously correct interpretation to see if the candidate notices it. The idea that you trust your interviewer to provide a directly actionable question is strange. I would expect that in campus hirings, and for entry level fresh grads, but not to anyone with even a year of experience. At senior levels, it becomes more and more important to spot ambiguities and clarify them before they result in misunderstandings, wasted efforts, and worse. I trust a good interviewer to have a question that can provide them useful data points on candidates experience, skill, thought process and attitude. Whether spotting ambiguities in the question has any correlation with future performance is harder to answer, but methodical people with attention to detail are preferrable to the alternative. If the candidate comes from an environment where questions are penalised, they would be a bad fit for a team that values and expects questioning. It is somewhat unfair, but either way, the interviewers are selecting for their preferred qualities.

acheron 3y ago

Ugh yes, the interviewers who give ambiguous questions and expect you to read their mind are the worst. What’s the old xkcd: “communicating poorly then acting smug when you’re misunderstood is not cleverness.”

klodolph 3y ago
The skill under test is for that part is “can solve ambiguous problems”, and what you want to see is that the candidate is able to recognize that a problem is ambiguous. I think the hard part is recognizing that a problem is ambiguous. Telling someone that a problem is ambiguous kind of defeats the point. IMO, it’s not about reading someone’s mind, but recognizing that there are multiple interpretations to what somebody has SAID. That seems less like a mind-reading technique and more like, you know, a communication skill. I have gotten lots of ambiguous problems during my career, it seems only fair to have them appear during an interview.
philwelch 3y ago
He’s not expecting you to read his mind; he’s expecting you to notice the ambiguity and ask a clarifying question.
- chiefalchemist 3y ago
  The interviewer is expecting the interviewer to violate standard interview protocol? While the interviewee is perhaps desperate for a job? And the interviewer is - in his/her mind - thumping their chest about what a great and experienced interviewer they are? I can't see how that's a success-minded plan for anyone involved.
  - gpderetta 3y ago
    Asking questions is a protocol violation???? What kind of interviews are you subjecting yourself to?
    - chiefalchemist 3y ago
      Apparently, you'd be surprised (the kind of crap interviewing experiences there are). That aside, the candidate definitely has to err to the side of caution. There's also typically a time limit, yes? That's protocol.

two_handfuls 3y ago

I think what the author meant is that they dislike questions that require too specialized knowledge, so once you know the trick the question is easy to answer, but whether the candidate knows that particular trick is not otherwise correlated with candidate skill.

sneed_chucker 3y ago

Frankly, I don't want to hire people who are too timid to ask a simple clarifying question in an interview. A big part of this job is dealing with ambiguity and communication. If you feel the requirements of your task aren't clear, then go to the person who made the task and clarify them. What's the alternative, exactly? Staying silent and waiting? Wasting time implementing the wrong solution?

davidw 3y ago
Then make it clear that it's "real world" and that they can and should ask questions about aspects of it that they need more information on, rather than just hoping they do so.
- redditor98654 3y ago
  Usually all interviewers will say “please take some time to consider the problem and ask any clarifying questions if you have any”. This is standard for all Amazon interviews. Source: Conducted 250+ interviews in Amazon.
  - davidw 3y ago
    That feels very formulaic, which is I guess par for the course for behemoth corporations. If it were me, I would try and frame it like "this is an attempt to be a bit more 'real-world' where we've received some initial direction on what the results are supposed to look like from management, but don't consider any of it set in stone and I'm happy to talk you through it as if we were working together...". IDK the exact verbiage, but something that gets people in that mindset without straight up telling them "this is meant to be ambiguous, wink wink".
    - redditor98654 3y ago
      Yeah, I made my comment concise but in a real interview I do say something similar.
3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

davidw 3y ago

I agree with this... you're asked to do something and the interviewer is purposefully holding back information wanting you to come out and ask about it. That feels a bit tricky to me.

chiefalchemist 3y ago
It's certainly not transparency. I do agree, the real job would habe to deal with ambiguity. But this is the interview. The interviewee has a completely different mindset going in. "Playing games" to see how they respond...that's for the likes of the NSA, CIA, etc. "We can't find good candidates"? Nah. Your hiring process sucks. Get a mirror.

phanimahesh 3y ago

I have practically never seen a prd that did not have some ambiguity. I realised spotting ambiguity and asking questions is an essential and invaluable skill that needs to be selected for. One of my teams was very surprised that I rejected a prd for being too vague and put my foot down that it will not be picked up until specific questions are answered. They were, I would not say meek, but resigned to the inevitability of product managers pushing poorly thought PRDs and not having any say in the matter. I took my time training them to say no and spot ambiguities, and I like to think they have all become better developers and product managers for it. I always pick questions that have more than one obviously correct interpretation to see if the candidate notices it. The idea that you trust your interviewer to provide a directly actionable question is strange. I would expect that in campus hirings, and for entry level fresh grads, but not to anyone with even a year of experience. At senior levels, it becomes more and more important to spot ambiguities and clarify them before they result in misunderstandings, wasted efforts, and worse. I trust a good interviewer to have a question that can provide them useful data points on candidates experience, skill, thought process and attitude. Whether spotting ambiguities in the question has any correlation with future performance is harder to answer, but methodical people with attention to detail are preferrable to the alternative. If the candidate comes from an environment where questions are penalised, they would be a bad fit for a team that values and expects questioning. It is somewhat unfair, but either way, the interviewers are selecting for their preferred qualities.