5 ms·

Long-time Amazon employee here. I have to say that I despise with every fabric of my soul the lunch interview. I wish we didn't do it to people and I decline

Long-time Amazon employee here. I have to say that I despise with every fabric of my soul the lunch interview. I wish we didn't do it to people and I decline as many of the lunch interviews I have to give as possible--I don't think I learn much from the candidates as they are starving and tired and trying to put food in their faces. The best candidates tend to answer your questions instead of eating, making you feel rude for eating yourself; the worst candidates take big long thoughtful bites to stall answering. It is definitely one of the more broken things with the Amazon interviewing system and I wish it would go away.

packetslave 13y ago
One thing I like about Google's process is that we take you to lunch, but explicitly tell you "this is off the record, no feedback will be submitted. Ask any questions you want, or just chill out and eat."
- krapp 13y ago
  >explicitly tell you "this is off the record, no feedback will be submitted. Ask any questions you want, or just chill out and eat." And people fall for that?
  - mcmxcwtf 13y ago
    Well, it's true. But if you're paranoid you choose not to believe it.
    - krapp 13y ago
      I suppose I am a little paranoid, so I guess that's fair.
    - jchonphoenix 13y ago
      I've worked at similarly (or perhaps even better regarded) companies with lunch interviews. They always say the same thing. I've definitely seen the lunch interviewer pulled into the conversation. When the process isn't supremely formal, lines get blurred. Being paranoid is probably a smart thing to do.
      - skj 13y ago
        Google lunch interviewers are instructed to give no feedback whatsoever, and in fact the internal tools provide no opportunity. The only exception is if they do something terrible, like punch somebody (it has happened!) or say something really racist. Then, an email is sent directly to the recruiter.
        blisterpeanuts 13y ago
        Youtube link, please?
    - cdibona 13y ago
      Till about 2006, the lunch "interviewer" was able to put in feedback, but was specifically told that they were not supposed to do it. Except for some smart alecks who would put in "Candidate held fork in left hand, was neat eater" I never saw anything beyond "n/a" or similar non-feedback. Most often I would see a savvy recruiter pair up the lunch with the referrer so they could catch up with their friend and it would act as the 'sell' part of the interview slate.
      - smtddr 13y ago
        I can say that on my June 2012 interview at the GooglePlex, the engineer showed me the paper on his clipboard and it had a feedback section but said "(not required)" next to it. He joked that "Well, if you punch a hole in the wall I might write something". Other than that we just talked about hacking game consoles & Chromebooks & breaking out of Chrome's sandbox to reach the OS from javascript.
      - 001sky 13y ago
        Most often I would see a savvy recruiter pair up the lunch with the referrer so they could catch up with their friend and it would act as the 'sell' part of the interview slate. This is a functional and smart practice.
        tostitos1979 13y ago
        This (lunch with referrer) happened to me when I was interviewing there and I agree that it is a smart move. It put me at ease. Presumably by the time you are there for an on-site, there aren't any questions of fit left.
- username223 13y ago
  Who's "we"? The good way to do this would be to have someone who was knowledgeable, but had nothing to do with the rest of the hiring process, take the candidate to lunch. Even with the best intentions, it's hard to grill someone for an hour on the record, chat with them for another hour off the record, then not let the latter influence your judgement when your manager asks if you should hire them.
  - packetslave 13y ago
    The "good way", as you put it, is exactly how engineering interviews work at Google. The person assigned to take the candidate to lunch is completely separate from the actual slate of interviewers, and does not submit written (or any other kind of) feedback into the hiring process. In my team's case, it's generally the person who did the candidate's phone interview who takes them to lunch when they come on-site, but I don't know if that's a common thing.
- nanidin 13y ago
  At Garmin, they pull in non-interviewers that have interview training (for legal reasons, don't want to ask the wrong questions like do they have kids, etc.) to eat lunch with candidates. There's no pressure on the candidate, and no pressure from HR for any kind of report, unless the candidate does something weird that would indicate they're not a fit for the company. When I did lunches, I would make it clear that they could ask any type of questions or just hang out.
  - phamilton 13y ago
    I've always had mixed feelings about personal questions. As a candidate I appreciate the questions. I'm evaluating the employees and their attitude towards my family, my religion and personal history. I usually make a point to volunteer this information because I know they won't bring it it. Honestly, I would rather find out that being Mormon and having 2 kids at age 25 is a problem sooner rather than later. In my last job, the fact that I don't drink came up in the interview. It want because they had a problem with it. Rather, they wanted to ask me if I was comfortable with the somewhat alcohol focused culture of the company. These are important parts of the recruiting process, at least to me.
    - chimeracoder 13y ago
      > Honestly, I would rather find out that being Mormon and having 2 kids at age 25 is a problem sooner rather than later. FYI, none of the things you mentioned is (in itself) something that a company can (legally) choose to factor into their hiring decision. Experienced recruiters and/or interviewers will avoid those topics entirely because, while they may be able to ask questions that happen to reveal that information indirectly, they're risk-averse, and they'd rather not open themselves up to a lawsuit. That said, this is one of the reasons I get uncomfortable when people use the term "culture fit" - it's not a bad idea in general, but it can oftentimes be a euphemism (perhaps even unconsciously) for inadvertent discrimination. (Why is Joe not a good culture fit? Is it because his hobbies include taking care of his two kids, rather than rock climbing or bar hopping, or something else that the rest of the 20-something office enjoys doing?) > In my last job, the fact that I don't drink came up in the interview....they wanted to ask me if I was comfortable with the somewhat alcohol focused culture of the company. I can sympathize with this. I once had an interview where I asked why my interviewer (an early employee) left his previous job to join this company. He said that he felt "a strong culture fit". When I asked why, he said, "Well, the founder was drinking a 40 while he interviewed me". I waited for him to finish his explanation, then realized that that was the extent of it. I asked him to tell me more about the culture, and he made more some general statements, but was unable to give any other concrete examples. The only thing that an early employee at that company could say to sell me on the company was that the founder drinks during job interviews. I'm glad I dodged that bullet early.
- twinge 13y ago
  There was a time when they also tried to get someone who phone screened the candidate to be the lunch host. This way interview candidates would eat with someone they'd already talked with, and had already submitted positive feedback.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jonnathanson 13y ago
I did the Amazon lunch interview back in school. It was every bit as strange as you describe it. It was presented as non-evaluative, but it involved a fair number of behavioral questions and a case study. I'm guessing those questions weren't just my interviewer's way of making small talk. I had a great time visiting the company, and I ended up with an offer. (Ultimately I decided to go elsewhere, mainly for family reasons that were pressing at the time.) But the lunch interview was completely draining. By the end of the lunch I'd eaten about two bites of salad. Needless to say, my blood sugar tanked, and it's amazing I made it through the rest of the day. :)
relic 13y ago
I actually really enjoyed the lunch interview for Amazon in Seattle. The 2 interviews before and the 3 interviews after were strictly technical, and although each technical interviewer offered to answer any questions I had, it was clear that the time was up and I was scheduled to be moving on. The lunch interview was a good opportunity to find out more about the hiring team and the company, and was the only conversation I had that didn't start with "please write code to solve this problem" or "how would you design this". Although you're right, trying to eat while answering questions about yourself was challenging, but since I knew that going in, I didn't order very much food. But the cafeteria was pretty awesome! And I'm surprised at the poster's experience, I received a polite rejection email just a few days later. I hate when companies just cease communication after an interview...at least let me know, regardless of the outcome; I'd rather receive a rejection notice than wait and wait. But I guess it's a big company, experiences probably vary rather wildly.
hamburglar 13y ago
Is there something a candidate can do to get out of the lunch interview? It seems like it might be one of those things that both sides put up with in order to seem polite, but neither is actually interested in. I've been in the lunch interviewer situation before and would have been ecstatic if the candidate said, "I'm actually unable to go to lunch due to [some plausible excuse], can we reschedule for 1pm?" but generally, the schedule was already set at that point.
crucifiction 13y ago
The lunch interview is supposed to be mild and mostly for selling on Amazon and the team (e.g. you talking). Trying to do a real interview where you drill in is a mistake some people make. You are there to have lunch and make sure the candidate has a good time, there is plenty of other feedback from the real interviews that you shouldn't feel the need to add to that body of evidence.
jamesli 13y ago
I am strongly against the so-called lunch interview as well, if the candidate is already scheduled to meet 4 or more persons. When I am scheduled to have lunch with candidates, I never brought up any topics related to work, unless the candidates did it by themselves. It is exhausting to have an interview of 4~5 hours, and talked about your projects or work experiences many times. So at lunch, it is best to relax and eat. The candidates have to be well prepared for the afternoon. It is never to our best interest to make the candidates so exhausted so that they might not be able to perform well and thus we might miss good potential employees. So I prefer to have light conversations, no work . If the candidates fly from other cities, I will introduce the city, the neighborhood, and the life around. If the candidates are interested in any specific parts, like housing, schools, parks, bars, restaurants, etc. those would be very good topics.
alexcp_ 13y ago
I had a really bad experience with a lunch interview... I really felt it wasn't respectful to ask technical questions when you are hungry, tired and stressed.

packetslave 13y ago

One thing I like about Google's process is that we take you to lunch, but explicitly tell you "this is off the record, no feedback will be submitted. Ask any questions you want, or just chill out and eat."

krapp 13y ago
>explicitly tell you "this is off the record, no feedback will be submitted. Ask any questions you want, or just chill out and eat." And people fall for that?
- mcmxcwtf 13y ago
  Well, it's true. But if you're paranoid you choose not to believe it.
  - krapp 13y ago
    I suppose I am a little paranoid, so I guess that's fair.
  - jchonphoenix 13y ago
    I've worked at similarly (or perhaps even better regarded) companies with lunch interviews. They always say the same thing. I've definitely seen the lunch interviewer pulled into the conversation. When the process isn't supremely formal, lines get blurred. Being paranoid is probably a smart thing to do.
    - skj 13y ago
      Google lunch interviewers are instructed to give no feedback whatsoever, and in fact the internal tools provide no opportunity. The only exception is if they do something terrible, like punch somebody (it has happened!) or say something really racist. Then, an email is sent directly to the recruiter.
      - blisterpeanuts 13y ago
        Youtube link, please?
  - cdibona 13y ago
    Till about 2006, the lunch "interviewer" was able to put in feedback, but was specifically told that they were not supposed to do it. Except for some smart alecks who would put in "Candidate held fork in left hand, was neat eater" I never saw anything beyond "n/a" or similar non-feedback. Most often I would see a savvy recruiter pair up the lunch with the referrer so they could catch up with their friend and it would act as the 'sell' part of the interview slate.
    - smtddr 13y ago
      I can say that on my June 2012 interview at the GooglePlex, the engineer showed me the paper on his clipboard and it had a feedback section but said "(not required)" next to it. He joked that "Well, if you punch a hole in the wall I might write something". Other than that we just talked about hacking game consoles & Chromebooks & breaking out of Chrome's sandbox to reach the OS from javascript.
    - 001sky 13y ago
      Most often I would see a savvy recruiter pair up the lunch with the referrer so they could catch up with their friend and it would act as the 'sell' part of the interview slate. This is a functional and smart practice.
      - tostitos1979 13y ago
        This (lunch with referrer) happened to me when I was interviewing there and I agree that it is a smart move. It put me at ease. Presumably by the time you are there for an on-site, there aren't any questions of fit left.
username223 13y ago
Who's "we"? The good way to do this would be to have someone who was knowledgeable, but had nothing to do with the rest of the hiring process, take the candidate to lunch. Even with the best intentions, it's hard to grill someone for an hour on the record, chat with them for another hour off the record, then not let the latter influence your judgement when your manager asks if you should hire them.
- packetslave 13y ago
  The "good way", as you put it, is exactly how engineering interviews work at Google. The person assigned to take the candidate to lunch is completely separate from the actual slate of interviewers, and does not submit written (or any other kind of) feedback into the hiring process. In my team's case, it's generally the person who did the candidate's phone interview who takes them to lunch when they come on-site, but I don't know if that's a common thing.
nanidin 13y ago
At Garmin, they pull in non-interviewers that have interview training (for legal reasons, don't want to ask the wrong questions like do they have kids, etc.) to eat lunch with candidates. There's no pressure on the candidate, and no pressure from HR for any kind of report, unless the candidate does something weird that would indicate they're not a fit for the company. When I did lunches, I would make it clear that they could ask any type of questions or just hang out.
- phamilton 13y ago
  I've always had mixed feelings about personal questions. As a candidate I appreciate the questions. I'm evaluating the employees and their attitude towards my family, my religion and personal history. I usually make a point to volunteer this information because I know they won't bring it it. Honestly, I would rather find out that being Mormon and having 2 kids at age 25 is a problem sooner rather than later. In my last job, the fact that I don't drink came up in the interview. It want because they had a problem with it. Rather, they wanted to ask me if I was comfortable with the somewhat alcohol focused culture of the company. These are important parts of the recruiting process, at least to me.
  - chimeracoder 13y ago
    > Honestly, I would rather find out that being Mormon and having 2 kids at age 25 is a problem sooner rather than later. FYI, none of the things you mentioned is (in itself) something that a company can (legally) choose to factor into their hiring decision. Experienced recruiters and/or interviewers will avoid those topics entirely because, while they may be able to ask questions that happen to reveal that information indirectly, they're risk-averse, and they'd rather not open themselves up to a lawsuit. That said, this is one of the reasons I get uncomfortable when people use the term "culture fit" - it's not a bad idea in general, but it can oftentimes be a euphemism (perhaps even unconsciously) for inadvertent discrimination. (Why is Joe not a good culture fit? Is it because his hobbies include taking care of his two kids, rather than rock climbing or bar hopping, or something else that the rest of the 20-something office enjoys doing?) > In my last job, the fact that I don't drink came up in the interview....they wanted to ask me if I was comfortable with the somewhat alcohol focused culture of the company. I can sympathize with this. I once had an interview where I asked why my interviewer (an early employee) left his previous job to join this company. He said that he felt "a strong culture fit". When I asked why, he said, "Well, the founder was drinking a 40 while he interviewed me". I waited for him to finish his explanation, then realized that that was the extent of it. I asked him to tell me more about the culture, and he made more some general statements, but was unable to give any other concrete examples. The only thing that an early employee at that company could say to sell me on the company was that the founder drinks during job interviews. I'm glad I dodged that bullet early.
twinge 13y ago
There was a time when they also tried to get someone who phone screened the candidate to be the lunch host. This way interview candidates would eat with someone they'd already talked with, and had already submitted positive feedback.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

jonnathanson 13y ago

I did the Amazon lunch interview back in school. It was every bit as strange as you describe it. It was presented as non-evaluative, but it involved a fair number of behavioral questions and a case study. I'm guessing those questions weren't just my interviewer's way of making small talk. I had a great time visiting the company, and I ended up with an offer. (Ultimately I decided to go elsewhere, mainly for family reasons that were pressing at the time.) But the lunch interview was completely draining. By the end of the lunch I'd eaten about two bites of salad. Needless to say, my blood sugar tanked, and it's amazing I made it through the rest of the day. :)

relic 13y ago

I actually really enjoyed the lunch interview for Amazon in Seattle. The 2 interviews before and the 3 interviews after were strictly technical, and although each technical interviewer offered to answer any questions I had, it was clear that the time was up and I was scheduled to be moving on. The lunch interview was a good opportunity to find out more about the hiring team and the company, and was the only conversation I had that didn't start with "please write code to solve this problem" or "how would you design this". Although you're right, trying to eat while answering questions about yourself was challenging, but since I knew that going in, I didn't order very much food. But the cafeteria was pretty awesome! And I'm surprised at the poster's experience, I received a polite rejection email just a few days later. I hate when companies just cease communication after an interview...at least let me know, regardless of the outcome; I'd rather receive a rejection notice than wait and wait. But I guess it's a big company, experiences probably vary rather wildly.

hamburglar 13y ago

Is there something a candidate can do to get out of the lunch interview? It seems like it might be one of those things that both sides put up with in order to seem polite, but neither is actually interested in. I've been in the lunch interviewer situation before and would have been ecstatic if the candidate said, "I'm actually unable to go to lunch due to [some plausible excuse], can we reschedule for 1pm?" but generally, the schedule was already set at that point.

crucifiction 13y ago

The lunch interview is supposed to be mild and mostly for selling on Amazon and the team (e.g. you talking). Trying to do a real interview where you drill in is a mistake some people make. You are there to have lunch and make sure the candidate has a good time, there is plenty of other feedback from the real interviews that you shouldn't feel the need to add to that body of evidence.

jamesli 13y ago

I am strongly against the so-called lunch interview as well, if the candidate is already scheduled to meet 4 or more persons. When I am scheduled to have lunch with candidates, I never brought up any topics related to work, unless the candidates did it by themselves. It is exhausting to have an interview of 4~5 hours, and talked about your projects or work experiences many times. So at lunch, it is best to relax and eat. The candidates have to be well prepared for the afternoon. It is never to our best interest to make the candidates so exhausted so that they might not be able to perform well and thus we might miss good potential employees. So I prefer to have light conversations, no work . If the candidates fly from other cities, I will introduce the city, the neighborhood, and the life around. If the candidates are interested in any specific parts, like housing, schools, parks, bars, restaurants, etc. those would be very good topics.

alexcp_ 13y ago

I had a really bad experience with a lunch interview... I really felt it wasn't respectful to ask technical questions when you are hungry, tired and stressed.