4 ms·

Would be funny if the interviewer wrote the exact same blog post; "I had the worst candidate interview today, I asked him a simple ice-breaker question before

Would be funny if the interviewer wrote the exact same blog post; "I had the worst candidate interview today, I asked him a simple ice-breaker question before getting into more technical stuff, and he just went off about his family and relationships for an hour; weirdest interview I ever gave."

tibbar 4mo ago
The description of the interview seems like it was explicitly non-technical, though.
genewitch 4mo ago
you think that's what it was? The people with 100% of the power in this situation did everything 100% correct and you're not victim-blaming at all?
- atoav 4mo ago
  It was a textbook example of the double contingency of communication¹. In communications it doesn't only matter what each side is objectively saying. It matters what the other side expects them to hear. And that goes both ways. In this case the interviewer asked these questions to get to know the candidate in a professional setting, so they expected a diplomatic or professional answer. The candidate however misjudged the interviewer intention behind the questions, took them literally and answered them truthfully. Neither of these people is technically sporting a wrong position, yet the communication broke down. That being said, the idea that you can choose not to talk about certain things is pretty basal when it comes to communications. If you have a trauma nobody can force you to talk about it and you should also not talk to everybody and their dog about it (and I know people who constantly do this and have a tendency to regret it afterwards). It costs you nothing to say that you can't think of any specific day, or talk about a day where a old boss at a shitty student job abused you, to frame it in work terms. To talk strategically or diplomatically is a skill that is needed in many positions. And that candidate displayed a total lack of that ability. That being said I am not particularly fond of that type of question myself. Both as an the person carrying out an interview and the person going to one. I am more interested to see how a person tackles certain situations than to have them tell me stories about it. ¹: see https://www.orientation-philosophy.com/glossary/double-contingency-of-communication/ https://www.orientation-philosophy.com/glossary/double-conti...
  - consp 4mo ago
    > In this case the interviewer asked these questions to get to know the candidate in a professional setting, so they expected a diplomatic or professional answer And there is no bias in this assumption whatsoever?
  - KalMann 4mo ago
    This interview lasted over an hour. If he was answering wrong they should have said something.
  - klibertp 4mo ago
    No. Reread the post. This interview was specifically explained as a non-technical, cultural-fit talk, and the interviewer "gave an impression of this being a safe space". That means they said something specific to hint that this is the case. Don't blame the poor guy who was subjected to this. You're projecting your understanding of what is normal for the interviewer and assuming that the particular interviewer didn't cross any of the lines you wouldn't. Unless you are the interviewer or know their side of the story, there is literally nothing in the post that would suggest your reading is correct. A simpler explanation: the interviewer was an amateur psychologist with little experience in either interviewing or therapy. They asked "interesting questions," then were overwhelmed by answers they hadn't expected and couldn't gracefully handle. That's it. Please, unless you know more about that particular instance, don't reflexively blame the candidate for what looks like a series of errors on the interviewer's part.
- AussieWog93 4mo ago
  "Victim blaming" because of a bad interview. lolwut
hluska 4mo ago
“He kept talking about dead babies, failed relationships and the time he cheated in an exam in grade five. Fifteen minutes in and I wondered not whether I would hire him, but if he would kill me and wear my skin if I didn’t. Or did. Little difference.”
huhkerrf 4mo ago
I've had that before. I asked a woman to walk me through her career (I told her I've obviously seen the profile before, but I'd love to hear the elevator pitch directly from her) and she started off by saying,"Well, you need to know that I was raised in a cult." And, yeah, I feel bad for her. But also: time and place. I passed on her because she didn't have the technical skills, but that was definitely a case of the setting not being right.
schnebbau 4mo ago
Yep. This is definitely an OP-is-autistic problem, or is perhaps inexperienced. Not an interviewer problem. Keep it professional. If an interviewer asks a personal question then you simply refuse to answer (politely), or steer it back towards a professional context. If they persist then you end the interview.
- eithed 4mo ago
  It might be cultural as well; I'm Polish and living in UK made me change my habits of answering "How are you?" questions. Same with Dutch from my experience - there are cultures where people say what's on their mind without the "I'm fine, how are you" bullshit. To be fair though, drama-dumping goes beyond that
  - arrowsmith 4mo ago
    How do Poles answer "how are you?" differently to Brits?
    - eithed 4mo ago
      Brits will either say "Fine, thanks" or not respond at all. Poles will tell you that yesterday they went to visit their relatives, and now they're tired, or that their cat is sick, or that they having problems with something. It's a difference between "asking when you don't care about response" vs "asking because you genuinely want to know how the other person is"
      - TRiG_Ireland 4mo ago
        In the UK, a perfectly valid answer to "How are you?" is "How are you?"
        eithed 4mo ago
        Yes :D In Poland you would just say Hej! = I acknowledge you being there but I don't want to chat. But again, back to the point I was trying to make - the intent behind these sort of questions (and answers) can be cultural

tibbar 4mo ago

The description of the interview seems like it was explicitly non-technical, though.

genewitch 4mo ago

you think that's what it was? The people with 100% of the power in this situation did everything 100% correct and you're not victim-blaming at all?

atoav 4mo ago
It was a textbook example of the double contingency of communication¹. In communications it doesn't only matter what each side is objectively saying. It matters what the other side expects them to hear. And that goes both ways. In this case the interviewer asked these questions to get to know the candidate in a professional setting, so they expected a diplomatic or professional answer. The candidate however misjudged the interviewer intention behind the questions, took them literally and answered them truthfully. Neither of these people is technically sporting a wrong position, yet the communication broke down. That being said, the idea that you can choose not to talk about certain things is pretty basal when it comes to communications. If you have a trauma nobody can force you to talk about it and you should also not talk to everybody and their dog about it (and I know people who constantly do this and have a tendency to regret it afterwards). It costs you nothing to say that you can't think of any specific day, or talk about a day where a old boss at a shitty student job abused you, to frame it in work terms. To talk strategically or diplomatically is a skill that is needed in many positions. And that candidate displayed a total lack of that ability. That being said I am not particularly fond of that type of question myself. Both as an the person carrying out an interview and the person going to one. I am more interested to see how a person tackles certain situations than to have them tell me stories about it. ¹: see https://www.orientation-philosophy.com/glossary/double-contingency-of-communication/ https://www.orientation-philosophy.com/glossary/double-conti...
- consp 4mo ago
  > In this case the interviewer asked these questions to get to know the candidate in a professional setting, so they expected a diplomatic or professional answer And there is no bias in this assumption whatsoever?
- KalMann 4mo ago
  This interview lasted over an hour. If he was answering wrong they should have said something.
- klibertp 4mo ago
  No. Reread the post. This interview was specifically explained as a non-technical, cultural-fit talk, and the interviewer "gave an impression of this being a safe space". That means they said something specific to hint that this is the case. Don't blame the poor guy who was subjected to this. You're projecting your understanding of what is normal for the interviewer and assuming that the particular interviewer didn't cross any of the lines you wouldn't. Unless you are the interviewer or know their side of the story, there is literally nothing in the post that would suggest your reading is correct. A simpler explanation: the interviewer was an amateur psychologist with little experience in either interviewing or therapy. They asked "interesting questions," then were overwhelmed by answers they hadn't expected and couldn't gracefully handle. That's it. Please, unless you know more about that particular instance, don't reflexively blame the candidate for what looks like a series of errors on the interviewer's part.
AussieWog93 4mo ago
"Victim blaming" because of a bad interview. lolwut

hluska 4mo ago

“He kept talking about dead babies, failed relationships and the time he cheated in an exam in grade five. Fifteen minutes in and I wondered not whether I would hire him, but if he would kill me and wear my skin if I didn’t. Or did. Little difference.”

huhkerrf 4mo ago

I've had that before. I asked a woman to walk me through her career (I told her I've obviously seen the profile before, but I'd love to hear the elevator pitch directly from her) and she started off by saying,"Well, you need to know that I was raised in a cult." And, yeah, I feel bad for her. But also: time and place. I passed on her because she didn't have the technical skills, but that was definitely a case of the setting not being right.

schnebbau 4mo ago

Yep. This is definitely an OP-is-autistic problem, or is perhaps inexperienced. Not an interviewer problem. Keep it professional. If an interviewer asks a personal question then you simply refuse to answer (politely), or steer it back towards a professional context. If they persist then you end the interview.

eithed 4mo ago
It might be cultural as well; I'm Polish and living in UK made me change my habits of answering "How are you?" questions. Same with Dutch from my experience - there are cultures where people say what's on their mind without the "I'm fine, how are you" bullshit. To be fair though, drama-dumping goes beyond that
- arrowsmith 4mo ago
  How do Poles answer "how are you?" differently to Brits?
  - eithed 4mo ago
    Brits will either say "Fine, thanks" or not respond at all. Poles will tell you that yesterday they went to visit their relatives, and now they're tired, or that their cat is sick, or that they having problems with something. It's a difference between "asking when you don't care about response" vs "asking because you genuinely want to know how the other person is"
    - TRiG_Ireland 4mo ago
      In the UK, a perfectly valid answer to "How are you?" is "How are you?"
      - eithed 4mo ago
        Yes :D In Poland you would just say Hej! = I acknowledge you being there but I don't want to chat. But again, back to the point I was trying to make - the intent behind these sort of questions (and answers) can be cultural