Selecting Against Experience - Do Employers Know? 292
IBitOBear asks: "A couple days ago I did 'the interview loop' at that leading online retailer. Over the course of six hours I was repeatedly introduced to a guy in his early twenties, who would then ask me to write out code on a white-board for a problem that you might find in the study guide for a 200-level computer science class. I have 20 years of experience in programming and systems design. And in several cases the interviewers were vague, semantically incorrect, or self-contradictory. Interviewer blunders included not understanding that non-normal forms in databases -can be- more correct or efficient when the domain of a data is extremely limited; or choosing a leader among N candidates -is- a byzantine agreement problem. In short, the loop would have been perfect to weed out some guy getting his first job fresh out of school, but it definitely exerted selection pressure towards excluding experienced candidates. So employers, what are you doing to make sure that you are not culling out candidates with the low-ball? Job seekers, what do you do when you find yourself trapped in a sophomore study group?"
Re:20 years? So what? (Score:5, Informative)
Irrelevant, it's a basic problem.
2) There are framework functions to reverse a linked list. Who cares how they work.
See (1), it demonstrates problem-solving skills and it's not an unreasonable problem to solve. It may be insulting if you think they think you're that much of a dolt that it'd be challenging. But otherwise it's not hard at all if they give you enough time.
And let's say it is in that framework: you need to understand linked lists anyways if your problem uses lists that needs to be searched, you would know that using the list would be unwise.
And say you do "Google it". How do you verify that the code is correct? "oops this is code to reverse a circular linked list...ummmm."
I agree that you should probably not insult the guy's intelligence with such a question, or asking hm the question and giving a gameshow time limit.
And inane questions too. I had some guy ask me "what data structure would you use in designing a database application?" You just have to be gracious, don't act snobby, and "suck it up" like someone said. Joke about it later with his co-workers
Since you might care... A clarification. (Score:5, Informative)
Also, I have done hiring. I appreciate the need to ask some simple coding questions because it isn't that uncommon to get people in who _can't_ write a bsearch and who cannot demonstrate a mastery of the simple language syntax. But you only really need to walk that mountaiside once in the interview process.
Then again, when you write some code on a white-board and the interviewer cannot understand it (q.v. "I don't understand... why are you checking the value of the pointer and then the contents of the pointer") and then that interviewer helps build the group decision that "we should get someone more technical", you are entering the realm of high comedy.
I actually laughed when the recruiter told me about their rationale.
Honesty is the best policy (Score:4, Informative)
I expect to be corrected if I (intentionally, for the most part) say something wrong, but I expect tact and respect, and I'll tell them those guidelines up front. BS artists have that look when they don't know something, and they get very vague. I don't need to play games with them. Someone who knows their stuff will appreciate the honesty and show their true competent colors.
I send BS artists out the door with a pretty precise explanation of where they went wrong. Hell, I even suggest where they need to get training so they don't have to BS their way through the next interview. This way they won't bother another employer with their BS attempts, or at least they'll know why they got rejected.
If you know it, you know it, if not, then you don't, that's my motto. No need to trip people up, the losers will always get culled from the herd as soon as they open their mouths.
Playing games with applicants sucks, IMHO.
Re:Umm.. maybe you need to look (Score:1, Informative)
Um.. Good for you. Are we suppose to be impressed? It just means that you had a job title for 20 years.
This is why there are so few old-timers in IT, I guess. Nobody seems to give a shit about experience, which is why we re-invent the same stuff over and over again and give it new names. The old timers just get annoyed and retired.
If somebody in my field had 20 years experience the first thing I'd want to do was learn whatever I could from him or her. I have about 14 years experience and I'd love to chat with somebody who has done computing for longer than I have and is still involved. I'd love to hear what parallels he sees in today's technology with the past, and what common lessons can be learned.
Sure, inexperienced people have plenty to offer, but I feel like IT is slanted way too much to the inexperienced side. Imagine if medicine or engineering were like IT... yeesh.
So, not really sure where your animosity comes from.
I'm sorry if I sound a little rough, but its just arrogant to be outraged by interview questions that are below you just because you believe that you have 20 years you are entitled to not answer questions.
Maybe after 20 years he felt that technical interviews should be more transparent, and not little games that he has to figure out. Assuming that they really were "testing" him, and they weren't simply incompetent. If the latter, he should've just thanked them and left on the spot. If the former, I wonder why they didn't say up front "Some of these questions might be intentionally vague or contradictory. Just answer like you would if you were asked this question on the job."
Also a tip: if somebody says something to you that suggests they know something you don't, you might want to come up with a better response than "Are we suppose[d] to be impressed?"
Never use your provider's domain name (Score:3, Informative)
Never, ever use your provider's address for your website and (especially) NEVER use your provider's domain name for your e-mail if it's of any importance. Look at my e-mail address for a moment, and you get the idea. When you have your own domain name, if your provider terminates you, or you leave, or you want to leave (better service, more features and/or lower price), you simply change the termination point for your service to someone else. In fact, it's not a bad idea to have your DNS service with someone other than your hosting in case you have problems or your hosting becomes overloaded (like being Slashdotted, for example) and you get locked for excessive bandwidth, you can change to someone else fairly quickly if you need to, but you might not be able to do that in a hurry if your DNS provider and your hosting provider are the same. (Especially if you can't get into your provider's control panel because they're overloaded.)
With domain names around $9 a year, there's no excuse using your provider's domain name unless you're so broke you can't afford it. Which I have been, on occasion.
Now, for that, you can often get a geographic-based domain for free (at least, in the .US you can). I established the domain "paul.washington.dc.us" which cost nothing, and ran it under a provider that allowed free hosting if you carried a banner ad, so for more than five years I had my own domain name and e-mail under that domain for free. I still have it, too, going on eight years now.
Re:at "that" online retailer, they probably know (Score:4, Informative)
No, it's not age discrimination. It would be age discrimination if you hired the younger guy just because he was younger, when both guys cost the same amount.
(I don't know what jurisdiction this is in or any specific legal definition of age discrimination, but if the above isn't true, your law isn't written in English.)
Re:Your expierience didn't pay off (Score:1, Informative)
And are you giving the wrong impression? (Score:4, Informative)
The parent makes an excellent point, in that what Skreems and co. really seem to be testing for is people who match their approach. The implicit assumption that their approach is (a) the only one that works, or (b) better than everyone else's, is not going to help improve their business.
There is also the problem that interview processes are two-way things. You don't know me, so let's assume for the sake of argument that I am a good programmer who knows his stuff. The moment I walk up to the building of a prospective employer I am sizing the company up. The moment someone greets me (or leaves me hanging around in reception for ten minutes) I am gauging how much value the people at the company really place on colleagues. And when we get to the technical questions, I am definitely judging the technical competence of those who would hire me, and the quality of the code produced by the existing staff if I see any.
So, dear interviewers of the world, let me put this simply. I am interviewing you, too, and I expect you to know your stuff. I would not be here if I wasn't interested in your business, but I am confident of my own abilities, including my ability to find another job quickly if yours isn't up to scratch. And it will cost me a lot less than it will cost you if today is a waste of time.
What does this mean in practice? Well, everyone's different. Personally, I think vague questions are fine and expected. I'll seek clarification without a second thought, because that's how the game works. But if the interviewer is a smart-ass, or repeatedly makes elementary mistakes, I won't take it upon myself to educate them. I will simply judge them incompetent, and not take a job working with them.
Now, perhaps a lot of companies wouldn't want to hire someone like me. (They probably wouldn't like my non-negotiable rules on IP and my expectation that I will work the hours in my contract and not give them 50% more for free, either.) That's their decision, and I accept that my principles here will rule out some companies that I might have been happy working for. But just as an employer usually gets enough applications not to worry about missing the odd good one because there will be others, so it goes with good people and finding jobs.
As they say, first impressions count. This is particularly true of interviews, because you'll never really know whether someone is a good candidate or an employer is a good place to work until a few days into the job, so the recruitment process is really just an attempt to make the guesses more educated. In this context, I'd advise any employer who wants to recruit people who are good rather than merely young and enthusiastic (now) to stick to sensible interview techniques, and avoid the time-wasting and trick questions. You aren't really hurting anyone but yourselves with that kind of stuff.