16 ms·

My answer on this depends on whether we want to be an emotionally supportive group for people who make a badge of honor out of being socially and professionally

• doktrin 14y ago
  This is spot on. I can't even fathom why somebody would needlessly burn bridges like this. The fact that we live in boom times and enjoy near-unprecedented demand for our skills is no excuse for this type of myopic behavior. What really surprised me was that the OP's candidate was a referral. It's one thing to risk burning your own bridges, but it's completely inconsiderate to possibly tarnish the reputation of someone who spoke up on your behalf. Speaking for myself, unless this was a close personal friend, I would be very reluctant to ever subsequently recommend this individual again. Without delving into anecdotes, I've witnessed a scenario quite similar to this one. A candidate who was referred (as a "rockstar") struggled with the technical interview, and subsequently walked out. It goes without saying how he, and to a lesser extent the individual who referred him, were viewed in the aftermath. TLDR; Please don't do this. It's completely unnecessary and possibly inconsiderate.
  • brown9-2 14y ago
    Based on the company's behavior in the story, the candidate saw no need to maintain a bridge with such toxic people. So what positive results would have came from wasting more of your time and their time? I don't understand the deferential view towards the company doing the interview, as if a company itself could never be considered rude, myopic, inconsiderate or wrong. Also it doesn't sound like a referral (the OP doesn't work there), just a recommendation of the candidate's skills and experience.
    • euroclydon 14y ago
      Now they're toxic? For expecting him to have side projects or being primarily concerned with his programming skills, or expecting him to code a certain way? Those expectations may be silly, and ultimately a disservice to the company itself, but they're not toxic.
      • deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
      • deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
    • duck 14y ago
      Toxic people? How do you know that? You're hearing the story from one side -- someone who obviously didn't like the culture and most likely the people working there. We have all been in situations where one person takes the reaction of someone completely different than another.
      • brown9-2 14y ago
        Yes, I'm assuming his story is accurate. Otherwise we are just debating hypotheticals. I think that if you conclude that the company is not for you, and you feel that the interviewers have been less-than-nice, you are saving everyone otherwise-wasted-time by leaving early. I don't see how you are under any obligation to go through the motions in a process where you do not want a successful outcome. It's not rude to realize the company is not a good fit for you and save time. In fact, why should any interviewer be offended with a candidate who has made this decision and leaves early? They've already decided they will not accept any offer from you. The only reason to be offended is if you cannot fathom than anyone would not want to work for you.
• alecco 14y ago
  I strongly disagree. Perhaps he should have made up an excuse and be less confrontational. But it's not OK to let people abuse you. If you don't respect yourself nobody will.
  • timsally 14y ago
    > But it's not OK to let people abuse you. Yes of course. But what specifically in this story do you think constitutes abuse? The situation could at worst be described as a lack of tact by some of the interviewers. If your bar for abuse is that low, you're going to have a bad time in this industry. Or any industry for that matter! Pulling the ripcord because, surprise, a few 20-something engineers don't have flawless social skills is simply a mistake. Far better to figure out how to navigate the situation to mutual advantage, as Patrick's straightforward algorithm demonstrates.
    • alecco 14y ago
      > If your bar for abuse is that low, you're going to have a bad time in this industry It shouldn't be like that. Tech industry must grow up.
      • sitkack 14y ago
        My litmus test is, could I witness a person I cared about being treated like that. If not, then I probably shouldn't be there.
        • peacemaker 14y ago
          You know, your comment really hit me for some reason. I'm working at a place now where the boss is really quite rude to some of the junior devs. It's gotten to the point they are afraid to ask questions for fear of his response. As a senior I see this and make an effort to talk and sympathize with the junior guys but feel powerless to stop my boss acting this way - he is very defensive and argumentative whenever I bring this stuff up. So your comment about watching people being treated a certain way really hit home. Perhaps it's time for a more frank (and private) discussion with my boss, or even a new job.
• typicalrunt 14y ago
  I completely agree with your reasoning, and how we as adults should be able to keep emotions and thoughts in check. However... Where this particular situation differs is that this was an all-day interview. I've been at these and they are taxing on the mind and body, to say the least. If you know you aren't a good fit, there must be a good way to end the interview part-way and explain the differences. While I don't agree with getting up and leaving, I think it is wrong to waste people's time with a fruitless prospect.
• Peroni 14y ago
  I would not act to antagonize them absent substantial provocation. Nothing indicates that the person did anything to antogonise other than requesting to end the interview due to his perspective on the company changing. For all we know, his request to terminate the interview was a polite one. If an individual or organisation considers this antagonistic then I would argue that they are an ally not worth having. Whilst I understand your point about 'heck you've got nothing to lose by putting up with it for a few hours', I would argue that day long interviews are a massive drain on energy and time and in this industry both are immensely valuable to a developer. Whilst this may be a shock to an organisation who are obviously not accustomed to individuals standing up to them, decent organisations would learn from this and possibly review their interview process. A developer sitting throughout the interview and providing polite feedback afterwards on why they won't be pursuing the role would be lost in the noise and most of the people who need to understand their motivation won't even hear it. I think the developer did the right thing.
  • kstenerud 14y ago
    One important thing to keep in mind is that in day-long interviews, you interview with a LOT of people. Make a good impression, and those people could provide networking opportunities later, even if you don't take the job. I've interviewed people who, though they stayed the whole interview, ultimately declined the position. I still have much respect for them because I could see that they are capable and motivated, and were I to encounter them again (which is likely in this industry), I'd be more than willing to put in a good word for them if it would help. Now if someone had up and left halfway through? Well, human nature and emotions are tricky things. Are they within their rights? Of course. Will it strike at my ego or make me feel rejection? Absolutely. Will it form a low level resentment, no matter how minute? Unfortunately, yes. Anyone saying otherwise is simply deceiving themselves. Am I in the wrong for this? Yes, but it happens anyway. You're dealing with humans, not machines. Maximize your advantages by being polite and civil and bending a bit even when you don't have to. It's a small world in tech.
    • slantyyz 14y ago
      >> You're dealing with humans, not machines. Maximize your advantages by being polite and civil and bending a bit even when you don't have to. Absolutely. Having said that, everyone should have a sensible threshold at which they stop bending. >> It's a small world in tech. It really depends on whether you're trying to keep your employment in a specific category (i.e., SF Web Startups) vs. a tech job in any industry in a large city. In the latter scenario, there's actually a good chance you won't encounter anybody you've met in your "previous work lives".
• CodeMage 14y ago
  You should never say a word of criticism about the company to anyone but your primary point of contact and you should be darn circumspect with how you word it to him. Maybe my question is "socially and professionally inept", but why is realizing that you're not going to fit into a company automatically a criticism? I'm not talking about the guy who walked out in the example or the way the poster described the situation. I'm asking a much more general question and I'm genuinely interested in an honest answer. To me it seems quite legitimate that one could come to a realization that there are irreconcilable incompatibilities between oneself and one or more aspects of the job. I consider that a case of "it's not you, it's me". Are you really objecting to the fact that it might be interpreted as "I've got better things to do with the rest of my day"? I'm trying to understand the reason why you're so emphatic about this (e.g. couching it in terms of "antagonizing").
  • tedunangst 14y ago
    I suspect it's automatically a criticism if the words coming out of your mouth are "I only want to work with smart people" or on interesting problems, or whatever. I further suspect people will say more or less precisely that without realizing it. "oh, I didn't mean to call you stupid, you're just not as smart as me, that's all."
  • patio11 14y ago
    Consider the probability that one's opinion vis-a-vis the company's culture is likely to come out in any comment about that company's culture (in particular, Ctrl-F on this page for "toxic", now guess how many of those folks would avoid showing their cards given five seconds to speak on the matter). Consider the probability that the people who do fit in with a culture actually value what that culture values and their participation in that culture, probably rather highly. Also, with specific regards to everyone but your primary point of contact, I suggest noblesse oblige. There are particular company cultures which do not cause me to vibrate with sympathy. That's neither here nor there. No junior engineer at those companies has the power/authority to meaningfully change core bits of the company culture in response to my feedback. It's like complaining to a Delta clerk because my flight got canceled due to the weather: no gain whatsoever (the thunderstorm and the flight schedule are both beyond the clerk's ability to control), turns this into a you-versus-me situation to no purpose, and sucks up mental cycles that could better be used asking the obvious follow-up "Well, that's too bad. What are our options?" Your options, vis-a-vis a young engineer at a company whose culture you would not be a good fit for, include "Make a decent impression on him such that, when he moves to a different company in three years, if your name comes up in conversation he says 'Oh yeah, I met him once. Nice guy.'"
• studentrob 14y ago
  Well put and great advice! I would ask the OP, Would you like it if someone did this to you? Has anyone ever walked out on you?
• gadders 14y ago
  I take your point, and I certainly wouldn't burn any bridges, but surely there is a way to politely draw an interview process to a close without offending the people concerned? I once interviewed for what I thought was a PM role, and started getting asked lots of in-depth business analyst questions about pricing derivatives. After the first couple of questions, I interjected and said that I had been told the role was X, they clearly want Y, and that's not me. They agreed and I wished them good luck in their search.
• jblow 14y ago
  I find this attitude moderately disgusting and I would decline to do business with anyone who thinks about the world this way. The reason is: it shows a worldview where everything is about your personal advantage and not making things bad for yourself. It comes across as selfish and petty. That final paragraph is just kind of gross. I want to do business with / hire / socialize with people who care about the good of the world, hopefully more than they care about their own small situation. It's hard to describe what that looks like -- it is different for everyone -- but it almost certainly does not look like this.
  • bicknergseng 14y ago
    I didn't read it that way at all. That last paragraph seemed very polite and respectful, and keeping up a polite relationship will almost always be mutually beneficial to both parties. I find it hard to see politeness to be petty even if it is done out of a certain self interest. It might be an apples-orange comparison, but I think seeing this kind of shmoozing as petty would be like seeing doing public service to bolster a resume or something as petty; yes, there's a motive other than some absolute purity of heart nonsense, but denying the ends and means as petty because the motive isn't sacrosanct seems like the actually petty line of thinking to me. I also care about the "good of the world," but I think aligning self-good and global-good is a perfectly acceptable reason for doing things. TL;DR: No, you shouldn't always act out of self interest, but you shouldn't have to deny self-interest in order for something to be considered "good."
• HeyLaughingBoy 14y ago
  Your first paragraph so much describes the dilemma I have with answering many "soft-tech" questions online! Nicely put. Knowing how to say "no, thank you" politely isn't difficult and is always worth it regardless of which side of the desk you're on. The position I currently have is not the one I initially interviewed for. After being phone screened and then flown halfway across the country for an in-person interview, about 3 hours in I told the people interviewing me that the position they were describing did not match the job description that I responded to. Their response was to send me to another group whose needs matched my skills perfectly and we turned out to be a great fit. I'm still there years later.
• spaghetti 14y ago
  Your first sentence implies that the interviewee wasn't acting professionally. I didn't get this impression from the post. It sounded like he just politely tried to end the interview process. Without more details and perhaps both sides of the story it's a mistake to label his behavior as inept. You make a good point about moving careers forward. Gaining a useful industry contact is probably worth putting up with just a few hours of unwanted technical interviews (which are good, free practice like you said). This is true even if the culture is not a good fit. However the company was hostile and rude. They should have calmly and casually abided by the interviewee's request then followed-up with a non-confrontational email. The company's behavior during the interview process (when they should be on their best behavior) makes me highly doubt their value as a useful industry contact going forward.
• roc 14y ago
  If we want to give advice that will insulate people from making a poor networking decision, stick to: "go through the motions for the entire process." Because the negative reaction from the interviewer isn't to any perceived rudeness in the way you decline. The reaction comes from the fact that you declined at all; the part where you effectively say: "I don't want to work here and no plausible amount of money is going to change my mind." I have both cut an interview short and I have stayed through an entire interview and then politely declined to discuss an offer. Even when I went through the entire process up to, but not including the negotiation over compensation, I was still given looks of shock and dismay. I was still treated as if I'd had three heads and told them their baby was ugly. It was essentially the same reaction as when I'd cut an interview short. So unless you're going to go all the way through the motions, including haggling over an offer and then stringing them along until you have (or fabricate) some other, better opportunity, I don't think it really matters.
• tlogan 14y ago
  Actually, there is no need even to be "fake" (answering something generic). Try to find a good, real, reason to stay in good terms. There is always one. Be genuinely interested in them as people and as a company. In other words, always look how are you going to get new friends / allies. People are good in general (there are some jerks but that is beside the point).
• mindcrime 14y ago
  A company which is not a cultural good fit for you, and the employees thereof, can still be very valuable allies. I would not act to antagonize them absent substantial provocation. You know.. that's true. Very true. But I think it should come with a caveat... any random person you interact with could one day be a valuable ally, yes. But the odds of any given person blundering into your life in a significant position to aid (or harm) you, late down the road, by happenstance, is very low. This is my observation anyway. I don't go out of my way to antagonize people, or burn bridges, but I also don't go out of my way to pander to people or kiss ass just to maintain a "bridge." And while you never know what you don't know, I have zero reason to believe that any relationship I've damaged through this attitude, has ever had any negative consequence subsequently in my life. The world really is a big place, and you meet a LOT of people over a lifetime... there's a steady stream of new relationships coming along, displacing the old ones. Again, this isn't to say one should go out and wantonly burn bridges for no reason, and it's not to say that one never benefits from a happenstance encounter with someone from a different part of your life. But I do think we should question how important it really is to worry about burned bridges - especially if your intuition tells you that the person is question isn't likely to be a future ally anyway.
  • Mvandenbergh 14y ago
    That's true, but these people were by no means random. The very fact that he was interviewing there (especially via a referral) indicates that they were in the same industry.
  • Gnolfo 14y ago
    "They're not important" as a rationale for being selectively discourteous and/or unprofessional will put you under the adage of "Beware the person who is nice to you but rude to the waiter" in the eyes of those who you deem are worth keeping an in-tact relationship. Would you want to work with or for someone who you know will only treat you fairly and respectfully while you remain valuable to them?
    • mindcrime 14y ago
      "They're not important" as a rationale for being selectively discourteous and/or unprofessional will put you under the adage of "Beware the person who is nice to you but rude to the waiter" in the eyes of those who you deem are worth keeping an in-tact relationship No doubt, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying "treat people the way you feel is appropriate, based on your standards, principles, etc., and don't go out of your way to kiss ass or bend over backwards to appease people, just because they might be valuable to you someday because, among other reasons, that probably won't happen anyway."
• btilly 14y ago
  Depending on who you are, this advice can be anything from perfect to the worst possible thing you could try to do. I'm guessing that it is perfect advice for you, and it is not bad advice for me, but I know a lot of people for whom it is bad to truly terrible. The issue is that we have to work with the limitations that come from the people we happen to be, not the people we wish we were. If something has happened during an interview that makes you actually angry, and you stay in a stressful situation for several hours following, it is extremely likely that your anger will come out in a bad way. If this is your situation then leaving, despite being bad, is the least harmful thing that you could do. Yes, it is convenient not to get angry. Yes, it is wonderful to keep a professional face and pleasant demeanor no matter what may have happened in the interview. But we are humans. We have human limitations. If your limitations have been exceeded, the sooner you recognize and cope with that, the less likely you are to do something you will really regret. And getting space is one of the best techniques available to us. If that means leaving the interview, so be it. Now you may agree and immediately say that this is a personal limitation that should be fixed ASAP. I strongly disagree. I recommend reading First, Break All The Rules. We're talking about a personality trait here. In adults, trying to change your personality is usually a lost cause. For most people it is FAR more effective to find ways to structure your environment so that you play to your strengths rather than your weaknesses. So try to keep an even keel. Avoid argument. And if, in the stress of an interview, you get angry, try to get space. If need be, ask if you can have a few minutes alone in a room to collect your thoughts. But if you can't get that, and fear you'll do something you regret, you're probably right. In that situation, exiting the interview may be your best remaining option. (But note that best does not mean good.)
• sabat 14y ago
  we want to be an emotionally supportive group for people who make a badge of honor out of being socially and professionally inept Unwarranted assumption. If this interview was as bad as I think it might have been, it is not at all inept to cut it short. It's done all the time here in the US; interviewers cut short day-long interviews when they realize the candidate is not going to work out. There's nothing wrong with politely abdicating. "I don't think we're a great mutual fit. I will keep my ears open for you in case any of my friends would be a good fit for your position." That is a perfect thing to say while you're cutting it short.
• ScottBurson 14y ago
  Absolutely disagree. To anyone reading this: if you're interviewing with my group and you realize partway in that you're not interested, please, by all means, tell us immediately. The last thing we need to do is to waste time interviewing someone who doesn't want to work with us.
• ww520 14y ago
  I couldn't disagree more with this appeasing attitude. Companies have known to cut interview short when they realize the candidate is not a good fit, in the guise of not wasting everyone's time. Why can't the interviewee reciprocate when s/he has found out it's not a good fit? Why make false lying pleasantries when honest feedback is more helpful? Even if you have blocked off the day for the interview, it would still save time on the company's part to not continue the interview.
• Mvandenbergh 14y ago
  Yeah, this is basically the behaviour of a nut. It would be different if this was a multi-day interview process where the candidate has to come back (possibly flying in) several times over a period of weeks. In cases like that, it can certainly make sense to end the process after the first day if it really isn't going to be a good fit, because there is a significant future time investment that you can avoid by doing it. In this case though, you're saving yourself a few hours (which you already had blocked out in your schedule) at the expense of alienating the people running the interview as well as the person that referred you. Not only that, but stalking off in response to a difficult interview where you are challenged is a huge red flag. That's especially true for a senior position where you're looking for the skills required to lead a team. I see some people in this thread and in the original defending this guy's "right" to leave at any time. Sure, of course he has that right, but so what? I have the right to do and say all kinds of things that I choose not to do or say. I'm pretty much always on the side of people who say that you shouldn't waste any of your precious time on Earth, but in this case that's exactly what this guy did! He would have to be outrageously productive to get enough work done in the few hours he saved to make up for the damage done to his (potential) network. Not only that, but even at a company where he didn't care for the atmosphere it would beggar belief for there not be a few people at least that he'd like to work with in the future.
  • toomuchcoffee 14y ago
    Yeah, this is basically the behaviour of a nut. Now, that's not fair. The candidate may have had a weak stomach, or lacked a sufficiently preternatural sense of cool to people-skill his way out of each and every awkward social situation. But that doesn't make him a "nut."
• tshile 14y ago
  I don't understand why someone cannot walk out in a peaceful way that both sides understands. You tell the other person you've decided you don't want to work there, due to whatever reason, and in the interest of not wasting their time or effort it would make the most sense to stop the interview. Why would anyone take offense to this? I'd appreciate someone not wasting my time once they've made their decision...
• nirvana 14y ago
  Lets get this straight- this was a completely incompetent interview. It should not take a full day. A half day is a bit extravagant, but acceptable because a company wants to be conservative. Taking someone from programming question to programming question tells you right there that the company is incompetent in its hiring process, which means it isn't going to hire good people, which means you'll not be working in the best environment. Seriously- if you're asked to write code in an interview, your interviewer is incompetent at the job he's been tasked with. This means whether you pass or not, the interview is capricious and a waste of time. It also tells you a great deal about the management of the company. Being asked the write code is what junior programmers do when they are put into this situation, gleeful at the chance to try and make a candidate squirm and still full of enough hormones to see a potential new hire as a challenge to their position. Anyone with experience in software development knows it is not a performance art and that this kind of challenge is all about the interviewers ego, not about producing useful information. You can figure out what you need to know simply by talking to the candidate (and if you can't, you shouldn't be interviewing.) It really is a tragedy that this kind of cargo cult questioning has become so common, but it is also why companies are so messed up. Bad hiring processes produce bad teams. But of course, the problem with bad teams is they don't know they are bad. Patio you are being judgmental towards this guy based on your projections of your own inadequacy (e.g. feeling the need to be deferential to people who are abusing you.) Politely leaving an interview with a company that has proven to you that, not only is it not a good fit, but they are incompetent at interviewing is not "socially inept", it is actually quite the opposite. It is the meek nerd who is afraid of what others think of him who will subject himself to abuse only to avoid an akward situation or confronting someone. If people's skins are so thin that they cannot handle you canceling the interview, when they are clearly in the wrong, then that's their problem. You can't limit your life by other people's insecurities. The idea that an interview is some sort of power affair where the meek come and beg for the charity of a job is silly. Showing integrity by not wasting people's time-- whether it is by having a quality interview process, or by leaving one that is a waste of time, should be honored. And anyone who gets upset that someone else exhibits integrity, well, are they really going to be much of an ally in the future. Also, for what its worth, I've worked in software for 20+ years, and worked for a lot of startups. Only once have I worked with someone at one company and then worked with them again at a later company, and it was a complete coincidence. When I have gone looking for work, I've tended to limit myself to 5 interviews because that would give me 4 offers and a callback. To do 5 interviews in short time (because I didn't want to have to answer an offer when I still had interviews that hadn't yet happened) you can't be doing all day interviews! That would be 5 days right there, and by the time I went to the 4th one, I'd already have 2-3 offers waiting for an answer! Doing the all day interview is, itself, an indication that the company is only looking for desperate people.
• liquidcool 14y ago
  What confuses me is why he didn't ask them their opinion. Why didn't he say: At this point, I'm concerned I'm not a fit for your organization. Much of my time has been spent enhancing my business knowledge in lieu of coding, and that doesn't appear to be valued for this position. I don't work on open source projects and my free time is spent broadening other horizons, not coding. Do you still think I'm a good fit for this position? Even if he wasn't technical enough for their coding position, maybe there was another position - PM, team lead, consultant, etc. - that he would have been hired for. I'll may get flamed for this, but I see a guy who spent who got insecure about his technical skills for a heavy coding job he shouldn't have applied to (or been recommended for). I see this all the time. This doesn't mean you can't provide value if you're not a coding ninja; I'm not, yet think I do a pretty good job of it. But I also don't compete with recent CS grads for coding jobs at Google.