 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / December 2006Fair Interview Question?
After interviewing for a number of positions I found that I've a problem answering questions along the lines of: "Design me a scalable trading/pricing system." The typical aim being to "see how your mind works". Now I don't have a problem in attempting this kind of question having worked on these kinds of systems for the last 10 years. After going through the kind of rigourous technical evaluation that is required of these posts I find it quite galling that these questions aren't considered to be more a basis for discussion rather than an objective piece of knowledge. Going for a number of contract Java positions, I do wonder if it is a fair question? It's a question I would never ask as an interviewer. As always if this is inappropriate for this forum please feel free to tell me to bog off. > After interviewing for a number of positions I found that I've a > problem answering questions along the lines of: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > always if this is inappropriate for this forum please feel free to tell > me to bog off. I think all fields have those sorts of questions and interviews to some extent. I think they are after how you approach a problem, not really the technical aspects, and also how well you think and respond under pressure. I'm in medicine, so some analogies arise - in the mental status exam for dementia, many questions are after a person's knowledge of their whereabouts, etc. However, sequentially subtracting 7 from 100 assesses the person's ability to process and think, not just recall. Spelling "world" backwards, likewise. Also, when applying to medical school, several schools had interviewers that asked nasty questions just to see how you react to stress and think under pressure. Not very nice, but it is part of the game. > After interviewing for a number of positions I found that I've a > problem answering questions along the lines of: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > find it quite galling that these questions aren't considered to be more > a basis for discussion rather than an objective piece of knowledge. If the interviewer expects an objective answer then they have probably read, "Conducting Technical Interviews for Dummies" and completely missed the point. This kind of question is asked to get an idea for the 'passion' someone has when faced with a problem. I have heard examples of people being asked questions like... "How many petrol/gas stations are their in India?". The answer is irrelevant. Of course, they could be expecting an objective answer because they are a trading/pricing system company and are completely in over their head and expecting some free consultancy as part of the interview.... in cases like this my advice would be, "Run.... run like the wind!". > Of course, they could be expecting an objective answer because they are > a trading/pricing system company and are completely in over their head > and expecting some free consultancy as part of the interview.... in > cases like this my advice would be, "Run.... run like the wind!". I've seen this done in sales situations, where a company has a consulting firm pitch their service just to ask one question during the pitch. I aver that there is no such thing as a "fair" interview question. The interviewer must determine in a couple of hours if a person is going to make their life heaven or hell for the next several months. Be sneaky and tough, Mr/s/x. Interviewer! For job supplication I have been asked to write software, solve logical puzzles, design things with three buttons that in real life have a few dozen, even take a personality evaluation test (on which I cheated - I wanted that job). The balance is that the applicant is also interviewing the employer. There is just as much room for sneaky or tough questions in the other direction. - Lew > After interviewing for a number of positions I found that I've a > problem answering questions along the lines of: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > always if this is inappropriate for this forum please feel free to tell > me to bog off. The question is not attended to examine your knowledge of the nuts and bolts, but to find whether you know something about how those nuts and bolts fit together to make something useful. The interviewer is not seeking an answer he can grade as "right" or "wrong" or "eight and a half marks out of ten," but trying to learn something about how you approach a large and underspecified problem. In my own days as an interviewer (I have managed to wriggle out of that line of work) I spent virtually no time trying to catch people out on the fine points of programming languages and techniques and technologies, and most of my time trying to probe the candidate's experience and initiative. My favorite tack was to choose some accomplishment from the resumé and ask for a more detailed description: What was your role in the project, what difficulties did you encounter, how did you deal with them, what would you do differently if you had it to do over, ...? The discussions such questions provoked gave me a much better idea of the candidate's suitability than going through a long menu of "List all the superclasses of NumberFormatException?" or "Which methods of AbstractTableModel are abstract?" or "Exactly how many keywords does Java have?" Tastes and attitudes differ, but if I were being interviewed I think I would resent and feel insulted by the latter sort of question, while welcoming the kind that you find objectionable.  SignatureEric Sosman esosman@acm-dot-org.invalid >> After interviewing for a number of positions I found that I've a >> problem answering questions along the lines of: >> >> "Design me a scalable trading/pricing system." [...] > "List all the superclasses of NumberFormatException?" or "Which > methods of AbstractTableModel are abstract?" or "Exactly how many [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I think I would resent and feel insulted by the latter sort of > question, while welcoming the kind that you find objectionable. Then again, I figure the latter are easier (for me anyway) to answer, as my answers will probably be just as good as anyone else's (unless someone actually has memorized the pertinent info). Given "Exactly how many keywords does Java have?", I'd probably respond with something like "Uh... I don't know, really... I haven't memorized that stuff... Let's see... there's 'class'... 'public', 'private', 'protected'... 'interface'... that's five so far... do you really want me to list them all?" I suspect everyone else's answer would have been of a similar quality. Whereas faced with "Design me a scalable trading/pricing system", I'd probably draw a blank and maybe respond with "Ummm... You mean right here, right now...?" and others would have probably given a better answer. =P - Oliver > Whereas faced with "Design me a scalable trading/pricing system", I'd > probably draw a blank and maybe respond with "Ummm... You mean right here, > right now...?" and others would have probably given a better answer. =P Give me a list of prioritized requirements , constraints and timescales and I'll get right on it. Lordy > - Oliver It wasn't that I found the question objectionable but rather the attitude and objectives of the interviewers. It wasn't a discussion rather a didactic repitition of the experience of the interviewer. In my experience whenever there has been a greenfield project, major bit of architecture or refactoring to carry out there is generally a discussion. I bring that approach with me to interviews and it has not been the favoured approach in these cases. Is this really a meaningful question? > I bring that approach with me to interviews and it has not > been the favoured approach in these cases. Sorry for being bold, but there are two possibilities: -) Either the problem was more in *how exactly* you went into discussing it. I don't know how you did, so I cannot personally criticize you on that. (Don't take anything further in this paragraph as a personal insult. Nothing here is meant to be one) Just think, whether anything in how you led the discussion could have had an adversary effect. Did you get excited? Did you get lost in some details? Did you make it too easy (e.g. just stated, that the question was bogus or the problem was underspecified and looked for next question)? Think if any of these could have been so in the eyes of the interviewer. -) Or: it were companies/interviewers where it is in fact more honorable not to have been successful there. Don't tell us your choice. Just base your future job-applications on it. PS: My interview for my current job wasn't even remotely comparable to this situation, so I'm just rambling theoretically. It wasn't that I found the question objectionable but rather the attitude and objectives of the interviewers. It wasn't a discussion rather a didactic repitition of the experience of the interviewer. In my experience whenever there has been a greenfield project, major bit of architecture or refactoring to carry out there is generally a discussion. I bring that approach with me to interviews and it has not been the favoured approach in these cases. Is this really a meaningful question? > It wasn't that I found the question objectionable but rather the > attitude and objectives of the interviewers. It wasn't a discussion [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Is this really a meaningful question? Sorry; I think I misunderstood your emphasis. Perhaps the issue really isn't the large-scale question, but the way an interviewer might misuse it. If he asks it expecting a "right" or "wrong" answer, or if he intends to sit back and make a mental count of how many of The Required Holy Buzzwords your answer contains, then I'd say the question is not being used in a meaningful way. Keep in mind that "inter" means "between" or "among," and that there is no implication of one-sided dominance in an "interview." Each participant is trying to assess the other: the interviewer is trying to assess the suitability of the candidate for a position, but the candidate should also be assessing whether the position -- including the people that go with it -- is one he would be interested in taking. I would think twice about working with or for someone who wastes a perfectly good open- ended question on trivialities. SignatureEric Sosman esosman@acm-dot-org.invalid It wasn't that I found the question objectionable but rather the attitude and objectives of the interviewers. It wasn't a discussion rather a didactic repitition of the experience of the interviewer. In my experience whenever there has been a greenfield project, major bit of architecture or refactoring to carry out there is generally a discussion. I bring that approach with me to interviews and it has not been the favoured approach in these cases. Is this really a meaningful question? It wasn't that I found the question objectionable but rather the attitude and objectives of the interviewers. It wasn't a discussion rather a didactic repitition of the experience of the interviewer. In my experience whenever there has been a greenfield project, major bit of architecture or refactoring to carry out there is generally a discussion. I bring that approach with me to interviews and it has not been the favoured approach in these cases. Is this really a meaningful question? It wasn't that I found the question objectionable but rather the attitude and objectives of the interviewers. It wasn't a discussion rather a didactic repitition of the experience of the interviewer. In my experience whenever there has been a greenfield project, major bit of architecture or refactoring to carry out there is generally a discussion. I bring that approach with me to interviews and it has not been the favoured approach in these cases. Is this really a meaningful question? Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.