Hacker News Reader

Comment by Balero | Hacker News Reader

I'm someone that struggles to work from home, and who really likes having the dislocation. It helps me get into work mode, and back out again, it helps me separate my life and my work. I like being in place with everyone working, and much prefer being physically present at a meeting. So basically your opposite.

I think the key take away is that there should be options, what works for one doesn't for others.

View on HN

>I think the key take away is that there should be options, what works for one doesn't for others.

Pretty much the same for technical interviewing as well IMO. We'd probably like it a bit more if we at least got to choose the format.

Candidates aren't supposed to like interviews. That's like saying you're supposed to like final exams at school. They should be fair, but you have no rights beyond that.

Maybe that's true for junior engineers. I'm at a point in my career where I have no doubt that I'm both highly capable and able to start delivering value quickly. When I'm going into an interview, I'm evaluating the interviewers and the company culture.

If you want to talk about linked lists and Chicago piano tuners and things, fine, I actually remember data structures and algorithms quite well even though I took those classes 15 years ago. If that's the majority of the interview though, well... it's probably not a good cultural fit. I want to make sure that the people I'm working with are human beings I can tolerate being around 40+ hours/week, and that I can trust them to make reasonable decisions.

If you're really at that point in your career, you should find both that tech screens are easy and also that there are fewer of them.

Fair enough, I suppose, depending. Admittedly, it's been a long time since I've done one of those, but that's more to do with the fact that most of the work I've done for a while has been consulting/contracting/call-it-what-you-will, where the presumption has been that I'm coming in specifically to solve specific problems.

Right. You actually stop getting "unfair" interviews once everyone can tell you'd just pass them anyway.

Of course they are. Otherwise why would they come and work for you? Hostile interviews select for candidates without other options.

It's not hostile if you don't fail.

You could also say that people don't have a right to like their job. Yet companies that want to hire and retain top talent try to make the workplace as enjoyable as possible. Can you explain why that is in a way that doesn't also justify tweaking the interview process to make candidates happier?

You're not seeing the candidates who pass "bad" interviews, who aren't complaining, and who like their jobs because the bar is high.

Of course I'm seeing those candidates. They're my coworkers. Many of them are sad that really strong people they've worked with in previous jobs. Others are sad because they have coworkers who are incompetent jerks with good interview skills.

You're assuming that the height of the bar is tied to how good people are at their jobs. You're also assuming that having a high bar has to mean that the interviews must be a bad experience for the candidates. Neither of those are true.

Interviews, like exams, are painful when there's a big mismatch between what they should cover and what they actually cover.

If you want me to do the same sort of work as my last job, I'm naturally prepared - I've been doing it for years! But then if you interview me about unrelated garbage with no warning, I'm going to think less of your process and of your management skills.

I like good interviews for the same reason I liked most of my exams: it was a chance to show off what I've learned in a compressed format.

I prefer work from home, but I agree with you, there should be options. As long as the option chosen has no effect at all on career advancement.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com