I don't know. I don't do a lot of job interviews, but I do a lot of research/expert interviews. To me, there is not much distinction and the major takeaway from

I don't know. I don't do a lot of job interviews, but I do a lot of research/expert interviews. To me, there is not much distinction and the major takeaway from this post seems to be, "Preparation and objectives are good when doing research"....umm yeah. You're there to find something out, so putting in the effort to know what that thing is and design the questions that can plausibly get you to the answers you want seems like obvious advice. To me, if you are using interviews to determine the best way to spend your $salary_money on a person to get $outcome_stuff, then you really can't be walking into it without first introspecting on the knowns, unknowns, and unknowables of a decision. I'd hate to estimate potential team dynamics from interview responses, but I can absolutely validate that the candidate knows facts they need to know. But, it would take the preparatory effort to understand those things myself. The major thing I take away from this post is the conviction that hiring approaches really don't seem to have progressed.