Fork me on GitHub

I'd like it if an interview just jumped straight to causing a conflict and seeing how I'd handle it


Like a trial or a gauntlet


But that's just fun, it probably wouldn't give actionable information


I suspect a lot of people would be very uncomfortable if an interview took that turn... 🙂


I was just reading, on Quora today, about the most inappropriate behavior people had encountered at interviews and it was mostly centered on very aggressive interviewers...


I mostly see an interview as an opportunity to figure out if I would be able to work along with the other person, for example to see if I pair with the person, will we be able to solve a problem, or atleast move in the direction of solving a problem.


Yeah, an interview is definitely a two-way street: it should be a conversation, not an interrogation!


Yea, plus typically an interview is an asymmetric encounter. One person is losing an hour of their workday, the other person is risking a long term financial and psychological change. I would think gratitude, empathy, fairness, and kindness should be the priorities.


I had an interviewer for a college work study job berate me for not being professionally dressed enough when I was wearing jeans and a tucked in button down. That was probably my worst experience so far.

Braden Shepherdson15:04:29

I had a similar experience in my university internship interviews. (sloppily) wearing (cheap) suits was near-universal there, but I would wear jeans and tucked-in button downs. I had shoulder-length hair, always clean and tame. I learned to see quickly whether either or both of those factors was a non-factor or a deal-breaker (it was rarely in between)

Braden Shepherdson15:04:08

I had two interviewers challenge me on not wearing a suit. one gave me a lecture on professionalism, the other responded well to my polite answer that I didn't feel that wearing a suit would help me succeed if I couldn't do the technical side of the interview; and inversely that being comfortably dressed did not mean I wasn't taking this seriously.


meta-point for employers out there: please explicitly set expectations for candidates on this before the interview.


(interviewing is stressful enough without trying to guess whether people will think you rude for showing up in a pair of jeans, or whether they'll think you weird and 'corporate' for showing up in a suit)


For my first real interview I asked and they told me “smart casual”. I had no idea what that meant, showed up with dress trousers and shirt, everybody was much much more casual dressed than me :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:


Counter experience, my friend was told smart casual for a super market ( to stack shelves). He went in jeans and a shirt, the interviewer criticized him for it


When I did army service, we were giving a few uniforms, and a booklet of regulations. Problem solved 🤓


@orestis That's a really good blog post about kicking off an interview -- thank you! I try to do that too (especially since I run "behavioral interviews" rather than "technical interviews") but seeing it explicitly written down is very useful.


> I'd like it if an interview just jumped straight to causing a conflict and seeing how I'd handle it Likewise I'd love to see Wright-brothers style discussions in the interview process, e.g.: 1.- tell me something you strongly believe in ("Clojure is great") 2.- Now try to convince me of the exact opposite thing. This abilty to detach opinions from argumentation makes great team players IMO.


Strong agree, the ability to debate against yourself is an important part of being a collaborative person


That's why I specifically ask candidates to describe flaws in their favorite language/tech and also good things about their least favorite 🙂


(and I have had candidates flat out tell me that their favorite language has no flaws!)


one of our questions is "what don't you like about clojure" for sure


"well you know sometimes it's just too perfect"

parrot 4

its not what's broken about clojure, its what you don't like. everyone has opinions about some aspects of the language. doesn't mean the language is wrong just not your style or what you would have done


Interestingly, I'd succeed Sean's wording and fail Dan's. I like clojure, nothing really comes to mind that's broken. But flaws are easy, there's no types, it's got a slow start, etc.


No fail. Everyone has some parts they always brush up against. And that’s a perfect answer to me

👍 4