Reply to: Interviews - The other side...

[Churchill]

twice the national average wage in an area quite a bit cheaper than London seems reasonable, or maybe I'm missing some parallel UK where people get paid twice as much for doing the same permie job!

Yeah, I thought it was a reasonable salary too.

[darmstadt]

Many years ago I went to Thermos for an interview along with a young lady who was working with me at the same time. This is the only time I have ver had a test and it basically consisted of putting square pegs in square holes and circular pegs in circular holes and more inane stuff like that. She failed, I passed (and tried to boff her years later) and turned down the gig as it was obviously a job for thickos if that was the test.

[tim123]

Another standard MS question is

"how would you move Mt Fuji?"

ISTM that the answer is one bucket (lorry) full at a time.

tim

[wendigo100]

Or maybe it was this: http://worsethanfailure.com/Articles...Interview.aspx

"During a screening interview (at Microsoft), I was asked how I would design a bike fit for someone visually impaired. I responded something to the effect of, 'What, like, for blind people?', and she answered yes.

I thought for a moment and then I responded, 'Well.. a blind person riding a bike doesn't sound like a very safe idea, so I would make the bike stationary, maybe with a fan blowing in the person's face. He probably wouldn't even know the difference.'

She was speechless. "

He did not get the job. Despite the complete absurdity of the design request, and the complete practicality of his answer, the job will go to a candidate who manages to answer the question by designing an extremely overcomplicated solution for a completely non-existent problem. And that candidate will be the same person who designs their software.

[tim123]

However, there's another consideration - Geeky questions also test fluency and speed. The more syntax and tricks you have at instant recall the less faffing about and even web searches and enquiries you need and the faster the job gets done, and that is obviously a big selling point.

Not if the code that you leave in place in uninteligable to the next person who has to maintain it.

IMHO delivering good code is all about delivering something that is maintainable, not about delivering something that works. Even if you do actually manage to achiever 100% working (which is very unlikely) someone is bound to change the spec and want some new features at a later date.

IME the easiest way to achieve maintable code in C is to avoid smart coding tricks, you leave those to the complier. Just my opinion.

tim

[darmstadt]

Or maybe it was this:

http://worsethanfailure.com/Articles...Interview.aspx

[darmstadt]

Well I got my current gig as I had worked on the original product last around 10 years ago. Its based on Windows platforms now, when I used it, it was on OS/2. It now uses eWAS, ISC and Apache Derby, none of which I know but it does also require knowledge of mainframe technology, which I do know although the job spec didn't say anything about that. I got offered the contract the morning after the interview and have now been offered a 9 month extension to work on another product which no-one has seen. Some of us are good, some are kaka.

[OwlHoot]

I don't agree with you. IMHO that's exactly what there isn't. There might be a correlation between the ability to answer geeky questions and churn out working code, but IME it's likey to be spagetti code that works in spite of the the geeks analytical ability, not because of it.

Some managers like their engineers to write spagetti code, but I think that these managers are fools.

I agree that smart programmers sometimes produce obscure and over-complicated code, because their ability allows them to "force through" a solution with less thought than someone less skilled or not as bright might devote to a problem and come up with a simpler and better solution. The same thing happens in maths and doubtless many other areas - See for example Littlewood's Miscellany, in which he makes the essentially the same point.

However, there's another consideration - Geeky questions also test fluency and speed. The more syntax and tricks you have at instant recall the less faffing about and even web searches and enquiries you need and the faster the job gets done, and that is obviously a big selling point.

[TheOmegaMan]

Oh I see - you are looking for someone specific, with specific skills in specific languages, and a specific development environment. Someone like you really, specifically a tw*t.

[Churchill]

First, OK, let's make that assumption.

Second, who decides what is relevant ? No senior role is so narrowly defined that one person knows its entirety. It is open to interpretation which pieces of IT are important to it, and which technical parts should remain in the coder's memory.

Third, that is not stupid - I have seen it a few times especially in the City.

We're talking about a specific development environment. We're looking for people with specific expertise. Surely we can ask specific questions about a specific role working in a specific environment.

We're not talking about 10 a penny MFC wallas here.

[TheOmegaMan]

Firstly, let's assume that I'm suitably experienced for the role. Because, if I wasn't, I wouldn't be attending the interview.

Secondly, why would you ask me questions that weren't relevant?

As for the "tears" or "walking out", don't be so stupid.

First, OK, let's make that assumption.

Second, who decides what is relevant ? No senior role is so narrowly defined that one person knows its entirety. It is open to interpretation which pieces of IT are important to it, and which technical parts should remain in the coder's memory.

Third, that is not stupid - I have seen it a few times especially in the City.

[Churchill]

I have a lot of experience - I take a look at your CV which no doubt also has a lot of experience. However I ask you a lot of extremely technical questions on things I know a lot about and which you do not. I have the advantage - I am asking the questions and I know what you know.

Hence flood of tears or you walk out.

Firstly, let's assume that I'm suitably experienced for the role. Because, if I wasn't, I wouldn't be attending the interview.

Secondly, why would you ask me questions that weren't relevant?

As for the "tears" or "walking out", don't be so stupid.

[TheOmegaMan]

And how may I ask have you arrived at this conclusion?

Have we ever met or is this just another of your "2+2=5" deductions?

I have a lot of experience - I take a look at your CV which no doubt also has a lot of experience. However I ask you a lot of extremely technical questions on things I know a lot about and which you do not. I have the advantage - I am asking the questions and I know what you know.

Hence flood of tears or you walk out.

[Bagpuss]

As a matter of interest, how much would you expect a "Senior Software Engineer" in a staff role to earn?

twice the national average wage in an area quite a bit cheaper than London seems reasonable, or maybe I'm missing some parallel UK where people get paid twice as much for doing the same permie job!

[Churchill]

As a matter of interest, how much would you expect a "Senior Software Engineer" in a staff role to earn?