Advice that should be unnecessary

I don't believe people need these job seeking tips. Wait . . . yes, yes I do. I once interviewed a guy who took out a meatball parm in the middle of the session and started chomping away. And then there was the chipper fellow who, when asked to describe a technical challenge he'd overcome, launched into a story that began "I forgot the CMOS password I'd set on the CEO's laptop" and ended with his running a magnet over the motherboard. Oh, not to mention the chap whose resume claimed he had gone to Penn, but clearly had never even been to Philadelphia on a field trip. And how could I forget the guy whose breath reached all the way across the conference table and threatened to asphyxiate me . . .

Frankly, it's a miracle unemployment is as low as it is.

Comments

It goes the other way, too (in what proportion, who knows).

I know stories of people who got invited in, left somewhere and never found...

There is a great percentage of people who are masters of the "lazy" interview. Not only not reading a resume, but not even thinking a slight bit about the types of qualities they prefer or what questions might elicit information that would be relevant to a job decision.

I've been given an employment form to fill out (and know people who have refused them and walked out) and then told, after 40 minutes of writing down mind-numbing details in itty-bitty script, that "it's not really important".

I once had a guy doodle through an entire interview, mostly because I was too shy to stand up and say, "Why the heck did you invite me to come in here so that you could doodle for 45 minutes?"

I had one really very nice older gentleman criticize my work (without seeing any of it) based on a perceived lack of credentials, and then, later, unveil that he had no money to pay for a position, in a tacit ploy to get me to work for free.

I've been asked the equivalent of "when did you stop beating your wife", or pretty close, by a recruiter (who are permitted to ask even illegal employment questions).

In Boston, one interviewer smugly asked how I was getting along in the gay neighborhood ... *wink* *wink* not directly, of course, but by reference the part of town with that deprecating "I see you have a purple halo" tone.

On the phone, I had one manager of Human Resources *ask me* what time I could come in for an interview, and, when I suggested a 10:00 a.m. time on Thursday, got verbally upset with me for not making myself available at their convenience. (I've had recruiters play games, canceling meetings to see how I'd react).

Then there is job-description crossed-wires. I once interviewed with three people who thought they were interviewing for job X, while I though I was interviewing for job Y. What is amazing is that 85% of the interviewing ... went *well*.

And then there are the questions that just seem to bring you down to reality, fast. After x number of years of experience and y numbers of years of education, the hiring question I got was, "Do you know how to run a regression?"

It was at that point I pulled out my meatball parm. (Actually, it turned out to be a good gig, sigh, so you never know ...).

Posted by Amicus | May 15, 2008 12:43 AM

I once interviewed someone for an entry level IT job. He did great--had an associates degree, headed up the professional development club at school, sounded confident and competent, asked good questions, and gave good answers.

After an hour I wrapped up the interview, and he told me that he'd spent ten years in prison "sexual assault upon a minor". He prefaced it by saying "this is the part of the interview where you find out where you're not going to hire me."

I was weirdly impressed. He was in the state sexual offenders database, and would have come up on a basic criminal records search--thus his volunteering the information. So here's a guy who went to jail for molesting a child, did his time, went out and got professional training, and gave great interviews, only to openly acknowledge that he was socially unhirable.

It was his commitment to penance that impressed me, I suppose. He said that going through this was part of the consequences of what he'd done, and he was facing it. Under other circumstances I might have hired him--it's IT, there's no contact with children, and he displayed more maturity than most coworkers I've had. Then again, he was a child molester. Hard to get past that.

Posted by Justin JJ | May 15, 2008 12:45 AM

"I once had a guy doodle through an entire interview, mostly because I was too shy to stand up and say, "Why the heck did you invite me to come in here so that you could doodle for 45 minutes?""

You seem to be assuming that he wasn't listening to you, because he was doodling. Do you have any evidence of that, or is it just an assumption on your part? I take notes or doodle during seminars because it's much harder for me to listen if I'm not writing. Some people's brains work like that. My mind wanders if I'm just sitting there.

I've tried to think about how to work this into my teaching. In my MBA classes, about half the students say that they can concentrate better if they can just listen without writing things down, while the other half say that, like me, they can focus better if they are writing than if they just listen.

If the 'doodles' had been writing down words related to what you were saying, would you then have assumed that the interviewer was listening, or do you object to any hand motion at all? Personally, I could focus better if I was knitting than if I was just sitting there. People operate differently.

Posted by Ann | May 15, 2008 1:03 AM

The advice in that article was totally ridiculous, but it seems like they print things like that every few months to fill space. People like lists.

In the end, and on the lower end of the payscale, it's all a flip of the coin anyway. You can be pretty qualified, but maybe not working, and get beat out by a someone who has lied on their resume (as many employers don't really check everything).

Posted by Finn | May 15, 2008 3:08 AM

Job hunting in IT, especially software development, can be very amusing. Job descriptions requiring X years experience in a technology that came out X/2 years ago is very prevalent.

The really fun one, for me, is the people who look at my resume, which states "10 years C++,5 years C# .Net, 12 years C, 12 years x86 Assembly language, 4 years Windows and Linux Driver development,4 years Windows CE and Windows Mobile, some familiarity with Oracle, some familiarity with XML" and instantly conclude that I'm a web developer.

I get calls for web development jobs weekly, and I stopped looking for a job last December.
"But how much CSS/AJAX/$Latest_Buzzword experience do you have?"
"As much as I listed on the resume."
"But you didn't list any, and this job requires it!"
"You called me."

Posted by wiredog | May 15, 2008 9:32 AM

You seem to be assuming that he wasn't listening to you, because he was doodling.

I hear you but I don't hear you. I'll explain, at the risk of become the Dilbert of this thread.

I was very fortunate, way back when, that my company actually paid for a lot of us to go and get training on how to conduct an interview and get briefed on the kind of interview experience the firm was trying to provide. I was sadly conscientious and actually listened and learned something.

I didn't realize how rare that was, until later on when I kinda gathered that many mangers assume that, because they got the manager slot, they know how to interview. Of course, that's ridiculous. If you've spent your whole life fishing and someone asks you to ski, you don't just assume you know how, without lessons.

For others, their first interviewing experience is being given a resume cold by their boss and told to 'talk to this guy, tell me what you think'. This isn't my sole observation. The amount of attention that American companies pay to hiring decisions is notoriously low.

So, to circle back to your question, of course some people doodle while they listen (some very smart people, actually). But we wouldn't call them *good* listeners (or in technical parlance "active listeners"). Nor would one judge that really the best way to conduct an interview.

As for my guy in particular, I base my assessment on the fact that he dropped into a deep chair and checked out of the interview from moment one, via body language and otherwise, jumping at my offer to bleat on about my experience (i.e. "tell me about yourself"), because he had no question to start the interview himself.

Posted by Amicus | May 15, 2008 11:11 AM

openly acknowledge that he was socially unhirable
========
To quote Meagan, a propos of my first post, "it's amazing that unemployment is as low as it is".

I hope that's not contentions, because I don't mean to contend your decision/choice. It just points out that people have all manner of ideas outside a skill set as to who to hire.

Yet, you seldom see anything but "skilled worker" versus "unskilled worker" in papers on labor theory.

You'd probably never see a paper from CATO on the "Structural Costs of Social Hiring".

Posted by Amicus | May 15, 2008 11:22 AM

".. a story that began "I forgot the CMOS password I'd set on the CEO's laptop" and ended with his running a magnet over the motherboard."

Well, did it work?

Posted by Rube Goldberg | May 15, 2008 1:43 PM

Amicus,

Just curious how you could fit through the door with that tremendous chip on your shoulder...

I've been on both sides of the table, and it's important for both parties to be cognizant of the two-way nature of the interview. It's as much selling as being sold. If your interviewers exhibited improper behaviors, asked you to do things you didn't care for, or were just plain rude, then you learned what *you* needed to know. It's not the company or hiring manager for you. No big deal, just move on.

Don't take it personally that they failed to bow to what is apparently the greatness of Amicus.

Posted by David | May 15, 2008 1:48 PM

Frankly, interviews are one of the main reasons I freelance-- because they're completely worthless for permanent hires, and I hate knowing what kind of folks they actually thought were more superficially desirable than me.

Instead, in freelancing, they just do a quick check to make sure you're not psycho and put you to work, then six weeks later they try to hire you based on your actual performance, not on a workplace version of a singles bar routine.

Posted by Mike G | May 15, 2008 2:03 PM

Why would a magnet damage a motherboard? (unless it was a really, really strong magnet, and it got too close to the hard-drive)

Posted by john w. | May 15, 2008 2:04 PM

I took quite a bit of pride in interviewing prospects when I worked at a military contractor years ago. This work generally attracted highly educated people (20% Ph.D. 50% Masters) in engineering or Computer Science. Because I was technical lead on a number of projects and didn't want to get saddled with unsuitable coworkers, I generally probed each prospect's knowledge pretty aggressively (but fairly - I wasn't out to alienate anyone).

Well, one fellow comes in and within minutes I knew he had lied on his resume because he simply didn't know anything relevant about our field despite years of *experience.* Even his attempts at making stuff up reflected a disorganized mind. I wrote a *scathing* review and handed it up the chain. Well, everyone else - having just chatted about the weather or something - liked the guy! Because I was the lone hold-out, my boss, who really thought we needed more people, came to me and asked me to change my review! I ended up leaving it more or less intact but recommending a hire for "other" reasons.

The fellow, it turns out, was some kind of regional grandmaster (or something obscure) of D&D who played all night and slept all day, every day, at work. Within months they were trying to get rid of him but couldn't because he claimed that his inability to actually stay awake was a "disability." *Sigh*

I left the job not too long later and started my own business.

Posted by Wildmonk | May 15, 2008 2:10 PM

My most memorable interview (not really fitting for this discussion) was as I was leaving college and looking for an programming. I got an interview with the HQ of a fast food chain. The night before the interview a tornado swept through the town and damaged the computer facility building of the company.

I literally had to walk through broken glass to get to the interview. The guy that was to interview me took me to his office and was extremely honest -- "Right now our facility is down and 20,000 people aren't going to get paid tomorrow if I can't get jobs run. If that happens I'll probably lose my job. Do you really think I'll be listening to you in an interview?" I muttered something like "I'll call next week" and left.

Posted by Buckland | May 15, 2008 2:18 PM

I've had recruiters play games, canceling meetings to see how I'd react.

I cal that sort of thing "mindf*ck HR". It's a consequence of the fact that the HR field tends to be full of many of the bad ideas originated by the likes of B.F. Skinner.

If I catch a hint of that "lab rat" approach anywhere in the interview process -- from the subtlety of questions where the words of your answer are less important than "how" you answer it, to the outright "zap the rat and see if he still wants the cheese" of the above cited chicanery -- I walk out. If that's how they hire, I don't want to know how they manage a workplace.

Posted by Seerak | May 15, 2008 2:21 PM

About 15 years ago I was a shift supervisor at a craft store, so it was my job to administer a math test to new applicants. The test was a very easy arithmetic test that included questions like "Clothespins are 12 for $1. If a customer bought 60 clothespins, how much would she pay?"

You could tell a lot about an applicant just by watching how she took the math test (I use "she" because 99% of the applicants were female). Diligent workers worked diligently at taking the test. Distractible people got distracted during the test. A pair of teenage girls, supported by their confidence in their abilities because they were enrolled in a class called "calculus" at their high school, cheated off each other while giggling (and both failed the test, btw). You could tell just by watching whether they'd make good employees.

Posted by Wacky Hermit | May 15, 2008 2:27 PM

I was looking for a C++ programmer and one appeared. He told me about his deep commitment to animal rights, and how he had shown it in his previous job. I said that was OK, and asked for some details on his use of C++. He told me about a volunteer project at the hospital where he had advanced the status of animal rights. I tried one more time on C++. He started again on the cause.

So I leaned silently forward and tapped his shoe with his resume. (The shoe was leather.)

"Oh. Uh, right. Well, I've been planning to get rid of these and get some plastic ones. Now, about animal rights and the hospital...."

"You know, pard, if we hire you, you and I are going to go round and round, because I like to kill animals and eat them."

Posted by Simon Kenton | May 15, 2008 2:36 PM

A really, really, bad interview can sometimes tell you who would be an obvious bad hire, but a "good" interview really doesn't tell you much of anything. I used to be critical of sales organizations which just hired, hired, hired, and then washed out a ton of people quickly. Then I realized that nobody knew nuthin' with regards to who would be a good salesperson, and came to the opposite point of view.

Posted by Will Allen | May 15, 2008 2:39 PM

Does anyone think some of the godawful interviewees are people seeking for the mere appearance of job-searching while just staying at home collecting unemployment?

Posted by Eva | May 15, 2008 2:44 PM

I have never interviewed anyone, but my father told me his interviewing secrets. He was a reliability engineer, which the didn't teach in school, and almost no one really knew what it was. As a result, he couldn't really judge someone from their past experience.

What he would do was to talk about reliability engineering. The candidate who took the longest to have their eyes glaze over got the job.

He told me that technique worked amazingly well for him over the years.

Posted by Dan | May 15, 2008 2:51 PM

My daughter is a recent college graduate and is back in the job market. She sent a resume to one company, which called her in for a job interview. Unbeknownst to her, it was an interview for a management position.

The interviewer greeted her with the words: "I can tell you right now, I won't be offering you the job, because you have no management experience." He then proceeded to ask her what her idea was of good management.

She told him that she though one example of good management would be to read a candidate's resume before inviting her to interview for a job that she was not qualified for.

So some of the above writers are correct; bad interviews can happen from both sides of the table.

Posted by Barry | May 15, 2008 2:56 PM

There are plenty of stories from both sides, but what t comes down to is few people spend their time interviewing or being interviewed, and that means most people are bad at interviewing and being interviewed.

Although in today's worl, bad interviewers get outed in social networks, which is why "employment branding" is such a big deal.

The recruiting blogosphere has been covering this for years, and the basic principle is never read a newspaper for job hunting advice, and don't trust a job board's pr efforts.

Posted by Jim Durbin | May 15, 2008 3:02 PM

There are plenty of stories from both sides, but what it comes down to is few people spend their time interviewing or being interviewed, and that means most people are bad at interviewing and being interviewed.

Although in today's world, bad interviewers get outed in social networks, which is why "employment branding" is such a big deal.

The recruiting blogosphere has been covering this for years, and the basic principle is never read a newspaper for job hunting advice, and don't trust a job board's pr efforts.

Posted by Jim Durbin | May 15, 2008 3:02 PM

Interviewers can be odd.

Right after I completed Army training, I returned home to look for work (it was the Guard so that was it for active duty time). I went back to the University of Michigan to apply for a job at the library while I seriously looked for a career job. (I had also just finished my MA)

The interviewers asked set questions that had only coincidental relationships to my resume and the job in question.

At one point, I kind of lost it. One interviewer asked me, "The job requires interaction with students at a help desk. Have you had any jobs that were stressful to prepare you for this type of work?"

So I responded, with great restraint: "You mean other than the United States Army?" They moved on to the next question.

I got the job anyway.

Prior to that, I had worked at a video arcade (talk about stressful, guys with knives and drugs, police with drawn weapons, ugh) and was up for the job of manager. The existing manager reoommended me and the owner came in to interview me while I worked.

I attempted to talk to her but after the initial greeting she simply stood there and looked at me, never actually speaking.

After about 5 minutes I just sat down, ignored her while she watched me, did my job, and read a book I'd brought to pass the time in between the usual job tasks.

I got that job, too. Go figure.

Posted by BJD | May 15, 2008 3:03 PM

Well, if I was doing the interviewing, I'd reject almost everyone who has posted here, because most of you can't even type or spell!

Posted by Willytex | May 15, 2008 3:06 PM

I remember giving an interview to a guy who was going to be my boss. Great resume. Great interview. Right skill set. References checked out. etc.

I told my boss all that and wound up with "but I have a funny feeling about the guy". He turned out to be a disaster. Later I met some people who worked for him (at the company he came from just before we hired him) and they were so glad to be rid of him.

OTOH at another company I got to interview a guy for a project position who in a few months became my manager and he was just excellent. I had a good feeling about him even though he was a little light for what I wanted. I figured I'd train him since his attitudes were good.

Posted by M. Simon | May 15, 2008 3:08 PM

There really needs to be more "dumb INTERVIEWER tricks."

I've interviewed (too much) several times over the past 5 years. Background: I have a PhD in biochemistry, but I work on the financial side of the biotech industry (raising money, investing, etc)

How about:

Actual questions:
"What's 20% of 12?" (yes this was for a job AFTER I finished my PhD. A good, high-paying job that used quite a bit more math than that).
"How many friends do you have?"
"How many births are there in the US every year?"
"Where will you be in 5 years?" (if I could predict the future that accurately, I wouldn't be interviewing, I'd be buying my private island, you F***wit).
"So, you went to school in Berkeley...how'd you vote last election?" (yes, I honestly got that question) Answer: I grew up in Chicago, so early and often. (yeah, I got that job).

And then of course, my absolute frickin' favorite which happened to me last summer:

"You got the job, it's $1**,***/year, with a guaranteed minimum bonus, and a *significant* signing bonus (yes, real numbers)....24 hours later: "We can't do it. Sorry." Yes, the offer's rescinded. Employers, don't you ever whine you can't find good employees when you pull all of the above ****. Go crawl back whence you came and think about what you want and what you're interviewing for once, you stupid schlumps.

Posted by David | May 15, 2008 3:14 PM

We go through a big recruiting cycle once a year (can you guess the industry). All the applicants that we get to see are at least minimally qualified in terms of credentials, grades etc - so I am really just looking for signs or intelligence and a personality. Basically, it comes down to "if you are working for me during a 72 hour closing, will I have strangled you to death before all the papers are signed". I would also suggest that if I google your name, the first hit should probably not be your Friendster page where I see you sucking on the world's largest bong. I a close case, I will most likely let the internet decide.

Posted by holdfast | May 15, 2008 3:25 PM

David--consulting, right?

Posted by Megan McArdle | May 15, 2008 3:25 PM

We conduct interviews daily for a sales organization. It's amazing how many candidates will schedule an interview and never show up. We plan to have a 50% show rate for interviews.

Posted by Dave | May 15, 2008 3:32 PM

I'm a research manager for an electromagnetics group in a large electronics company. I interview many new EM PhDs. My first task is to have them write out Maxwell's equations in point form on the white board. You'd be amazed how many can't. At that point I talk about the weather until the next interviewer shows up.

Posted by ks | May 15, 2008 3:44 PM

Part of my first interview after getting a BA in 1988:

Interviewer (male, eating sandwich): So, when are going to start having kids?
Me (female): I have no plans as of yet. Do you have any kids?
Interviewer (chewing): Six!
Me: So, when are you going to stop?

I didn't get the job but have savored the moment all these years. Better than a lawsuit.

Posted by Miller | May 15, 2008 3:51 PM

Aw, come on, holdfast! There's no reason being stoned should interfere with a baby transactional lawyer's drafting of closing certs. Indeed, it might improve 'em!

Posted by lostingotham | May 15, 2008 3:52 PM

When I was interviewing people, I had two questions that seemed to be particularly useful in finding out about the candidate:

1) Please tell me about something you did recently that made you particularly proud.

2) What would you like to know about us?

If you listen carefully to the answers, you'll be surprised how much you can learn.

Posted by Andrew Koenig | May 15, 2008 3:52 PM

I actually had a memorable interview that was quite enjoyable. One question asked was "What would make you a bad employee." My answer was "A winning lottery ticket." Maybe a dumb question, but both interviewers about died laughing. Didn't get the job, but, the interview was quite a bit of fun.

My worst interview was with a large mortgage company a few years ago. The job I interviewed for in no way resembled the job the recruiter described. Had I enough sense, I'd have walked out of the interview. I told the recruiter later that even if I was offered the position, I'd turn it down, because I was not qualified for it. The other aggravation was the pay. The mortgage company was offering $75K for a 6 figure job. Had the job matched what recruiter told me, 75K would have been great.

Posted by Blake | May 15, 2008 4:08 PM

Related to this, I have had two different potential employers who did not bother to contact me after the interview to let me know I did not get the job. In both cases I had driven at least an hour to interview with them and thought that the interview went ok. Professional courtesy should be to contact the person via form letter or phone call to let them know that they were not hired.

Posted by pete the elder | May 15, 2008 4:43 PM

I'm curious, how many people here, in commenter Buckland's position, with any slack at all in time and budget, would have asked, "What can I do to help?" to try and attain the job right there?

I don't want to be unfair to Buckland because I know nothing of his particular circumstance. But I see so few people today whom exceed expectations as a way to get hired or promoted in roles and responsibilities. More the norm is "Pay me more and I'll do more." If you're in a good company with hard working people, and you want more responsibility, that is not a winning strategy.

Posted by Randy | May 15, 2008 5:06 PM

I was interview about 10 years ago by a nationally known recruiter for large PC manufacturer. The interview was done through videoconference where I visited a local Kinko's shop with the facilities.

It's was late afternoon where I was on West Coast, and the interviewer was in Boston. About 20-30 minutes into our session while I was waxing eloquently (or so I thought) she slumped back in her chair and started snoring...

Amused far more than angry (I was not particularly interested in the job), I just left. Received a very apologetic email refering to a virus, proscription drugs, etc.

But what a hoot!

Posted by JTF | May 15, 2008 5:09 PM

I had an interview a little over a year ago for a job in which I had both a phone interview and an in-person interview, followed by another brief phone interview.

During the second phone interview I was asked by one of the higher-ups what my undergrad GPA was -- even though I had graduated 7 years prior, had work experience and was in the middle of my last semester of grad school.

Then, after being told that my writing sample was about the best they had seen, I was asked to write two essays for them and given Super Bowl weekend to complete the task. So I killed myself researching and writing that weekend so I could submit it on the following Monday. After emailing what I had written I was told "Thanks" and then never heard back from them. After jumping through all the hoops they didn't even have the common courtesy to tell me I didn't get the job.

Posted by Colin | May 15, 2008 5:09 PM

"Well, if I was doing the interviewing, I'd reject almost everyone who has posted here, because most of you can't even type or spell!"

*were* not *was*

Subjunctive mood, my friend.
And if you are the type of boss to reject someone based on the literary quality of their blog comments, I don't think anyone here would want to work for you.

(Yes, I know that all the above clauses are sentence fragments.)

Posted by Zach | May 15, 2008 5:20 PM

I had the same thought, Randy. It might've been totally inappropriate under the circumstances, of course - no way to tell unless we were there - but I remembered a very old novel I read in which a pre-teen newsy who's been Big-Brotherified by a young lawyer is in his Big Brother's office, waiting for the B.B. to get done with work so they can go do Brotherly things. Idleness doesn't sit well with young Mickey O'Halloran, so he starts straightening things, dusting, noticing that a plant needs watering, whipping out a clean hankie and polishing the doorknob, all that. B.B., Esq., watching him out of the corner of his eye, immediately offers him a job as his office assistant, since he saw what needed to be done and just started doing it. (I love that book: Michael O'Halloran, Gene Stratton-Porter. Gene herself had some seriously non-PC attitudes, but she wrote a good stick.)

Posted by Jamie | May 15, 2008 5:24 PM

@Randy:

If i was the administrator in question there's no way I'd be giving out passwords or account access to some guy I just met five minutes ago. Giving him physical access to the data center is just as bad if not worse. Exposing propriety information such as that contained in a payroll system to a total stranger is beyond outrageous. If he had asked if he could have helped I would have responded with a "Thanks, but no thanks". And if our roles had been reversed I wouldn't even have offered to help for exactly that reason.

Posted by lewy | May 15, 2008 5:41 PM

One of the most common mistakes I see prospective employees make when I talk to them is they assume the interview is about them.

It's not. It's about me.

Oh, sure, we're talking about them, and we'll discuss pay, benefits, opportunity for growth, etc. But what I really want to know is what they're doing to do for me if I hire them.

I've had many bright, qualified applicants go on and on about why they really really REALLY want the job, but fail to clearly tell me what it is they're bringing of value to me and my company.

To the point where now I ask them directly what they're going to do for me if I hire them.

The ones who can answer that in an articulate, specific and meaningful way are usually the ones I hire, and most of them do very well.

Posted by jblog | May 15, 2008 5:45 PM

Well.

I once interviewed for a big book publisher for their IT department. They gave me a personality test and then promptly never called me back. :)

This is the proof, my friends claim, that I don't have a personality.

Another interview for another IT position I traveled 65 miles, as I was thinking of relocating nearby, and took the interviews. This consisted of 14 interviews, back to back to back, starting at 8am and ending at 6pm. I passed every interview, every test and met every requirement save one.

The company had a policy to *never* hire anyone who has ever worked for a consulting firm.

Such examples were prominently displayed on my resume and referenced quite often during the interview process. Irritating that.

Otherwise I haven't had too many issues interviewing over the last 21+ years. I've been lucky in that I can usually something interesting with which to engage the interviewer. And that always seems to be the really important technique.

Posted by Edward Royce | May 15, 2008 6:08 PM

Mike G

"Frankly, interviews are one of the main reasons I freelance-- because they're completely worthless for permanent hires, and I hate knowing what kind of folks they actually thought were more superficially desirable than me."

How do you like freelancing? Mind if I ask?

I'm curious because I'm living in NJ right now and it seems the IT industry in the whole state is rather ... constipated. There are wildly diverging standards for pay rates and so many posted positions are getting hammered with *thousands* of resumes it's become impossible to determine what is what.

It's really become a incredible pain in the rear end.

Posted by Edward Royce | May 15, 2008 6:16 PM

ostingotham - I don't really disagree and I don't really care what you do in your off hours (which will be non-existent - sucker!), but if you aren't smart enough to not post those photos or at least make them friends-only access, then I want no part of you. That's the kind of guy that will send the idiotic email to the client, or disclose our internal thinking to the other side.

Posted by holdfast | May 15, 2008 7:10 PM

My "favorite" interview was when I was between jobs, so I wanted to show I was eager to get the job. When the company called me I said I would be there mid morning after a four hour drive to get there.
I had a flat tire on the way but managed to get there on time. I was at the office a total of fifteen minutes, most of which was washing my hands.

The interviewer said he wasn't interested in me, but if I knew anyone in my field who wanted to change jobs, here was his number. I think I managed to get out the door politely.

Posted by Joseph T Major | May 15, 2008 8:41 PM

My "favorite" interview was when I was between jobs, so I wanted to show I was eager to get the job. When the company called me I said I would be there mid morning after a four hour drive to get there.
I had a flat tire on the way but managed to get there on time. I was at the office a total of fifteen minutes, most of which was washing my hands.

The interviewer said he wasn't interested in me, but if I knew anyone in my field who wanted to change jobs, here was his number. I think I managed to get out the door politely.

Posted by Joseph T Major | May 15, 2008 8:41 PM

Randy, I was thinking the same thing. Even without trying to get the job, I'd have looked for something I could do to help since I was there anyway.

I don't think I'm a particularly good interviewee, but I guess I've just been lucky about being in the right field at the right time. I've sent out my resume just 4 times in my career and gotten 5 job offers in response. That's without a college degree, and I never wore a tie to an interview. I always figured that what an employer wants is someone who will solve his problems for him. If you're going to bring him your problems instead, adios!

Maxwell's equations? That's a good one. I used to have a T-shirt with them printed on it, I could probably dredge up one or two.

Posted by Socratease | May 15, 2008 8:44 PM

At a large, and now currently out of business, Chicago area retailer I was made to wait close
to an hour before I even got to see the HR person.
Who kept calling me someone else's name.

Then I had to wait over half an hour to see someone who would be my peer. Who kept calling me someone else's name.

At least I was promptly ushered into my prospective manager's office. Who, also weirdly, kept calling me someone else's name. And the questions about my background in no way matched my resume. When she asked me if I thought I would be a 'good fit for the job' I politely asked her if I could see HER copy of my resume. She said 'sure' and handed over SOMEONE ELSE'S RESUME.

So I answered, sounding a lot like Bob Dole, "I'm sure would be a perfect fit for the job!". She didn't catch on and the interview mercifully ended a few minutes later.

In the parking lot I called the recruiter saying I was the other guy and told him the interview went great and I was certain they would make a really nice offer to . He didn't catch on either.

I wonder if that other guy took the job. Only to lose it a couple of years later when that retailer was bought out by a presumably more with it competitor.

Posted by CurrentlyEmployed | May 15, 2008 10:45 PM

A long time ago, last century in fact, I read a book called What Color is Your Parachute? Its main thesis is it's a lot better to look for a job when you're already have one and so aren't feeling desperate and projecting desperation. Apart from that, the next best thing is to sort of create your own job even within an organization advertising a specific job since that's what usually happens once you're in an organization anyway. It was a weird little book. It suggested building up a base of references, contacting employers, interviewing with them about their organizations and what kind of people they're generally looking for, what requirements they need, how to research the company before the interviews so you don't come off as an ignoramus, how to dress, how to present yourself, how to follow up and how to get more references from them. You keep a record of all this activity. I did it for about a year. I broke away from work to interview and made up my time, rearranged lunch hour etc., to fit them in, went after work, interviewed on vacation days, tried all sorts of things. It was fun. In the end I decided the job I had was actually pretty good after all and decided to stay put. But that whole process taught me how much people love to talk about themselves. If I ever interviewed for a job again, which is doubtful, I haven't worked for anybody in over a decade and can't imagine it at this point, I'd be the best interviewee ever. It would be sort of a reverse interview where I'd get the employer to talk about their company, their department, and especially themselves almost entirely. I'm the best listener. They'd end the interview thinking I'm wonderful and really need to be hired.

The 10 worst interview mistakes that are making the rounds on the internet presently crack me up. Comedy gold, that. A comedy writer couldn't come up with anything funnier.

Posted by bour3 | May 15, 2008 11:08 PM

Apologies if this double posted, had a bit of a problem.

A long time ago, last century in fact, I read a book called What Color is Your Parachute? Its main thesis is it's a lot better to look for a job when you already have one and so aren't feeling desperate and projecting desperation. Apart from that, the next best thing is to sort of create your own job even within an organization advertising a specific job since that's what usually happens once you're in an organization anyway. It was a weird little book. It suggested building up a base of references, contacting employers, interviewing with them about their organizations and what kind of people they're generally looking for, what requirements they need, how to research the company before the interviews so you don't come off as an ignoramus, how to dress, how to present yourself, how to follow up and how to get more references from them. You keep a record of all this activity. I did it for about a year. I broke away from work to interview and made up my time, rearranged lunch hour etc., to fit them in, went after work, interviewed on vacation days, tried all sorts of things. It was fun. In the end I decided the job I had was actually pretty good after all and decided to stay put. But that whole process taught me how much people love to talk about themselves. If I ever interviewed for a job again, which is doubtful, I haven't worked for anybody in over a decade and can't imagine it at this point, I'd be the best interviewee ever. It would be sort of a reverse interview where I'd get the employer to talk about their company, their department, and especially themselves almost entirely. I'm the best listener. They'd end the interview thinking I'm wonderful and really need to be hired.

The 10 worst interview mistakes that are making the rounds on the internet presently crack me up. Comedy gold, that. A comedy writer couldn't come up with anything funnier.

Posted by bour3 | May 15, 2008 11:10 PM

Edward Royce--

How do I like it, I love it.

Mind you, my wife is an attorney, so I have a health plan, we have a guaranteed income, and in general, the wolf does not bay at the door in a way that would make me nervous. So that's part of why I can live the lifestyle with a certain calm.

But I'll tell you, there are a lot of good things about working places without being an employee. One, as noted, is the fact that it's a great way to get hired without going through the standard interview process. Pretty much anywhere I've worked on a daily basis (as opposed to a project here and there) has offered me a permanent position (usually for substantially less money than I was making freelancing; you have to negotiate it so it works for you too).

Another is, you get to be sort of detached from the day to day infighting and prima donna stuff. You can be sort of like a consultant, bringing outside perspective to the stuff that other people are getting too insider about, and they don't hold it against you when you puncture the groupthink with a little fresh air. Of course, you have to live up to that by not acting like a sibling full of rivalry, too.

Anyway, there's a lot to be said for it-- if you can handle the insecurity. I probably couldn't if paying the rent depended on whether or not I had a good month. I'm sort of more in the save-for-college-and-retirement/take a great vacation dept., so it's okay.

Posted by Mike G | May 15, 2008 11:54 PM

We were interviewing just today for PC techs. All 5 people interviewed had 10 to 15 years experience as PC techs. After the interview we have them fix a PC to see if they know what they are doing. Today they had to install a power supply. Not difficult if you have ever done it before. Only 1 of the 5 could. This was a standard clone PC, nothing special. We have had "experienced" people who literally didn't know which was is up on the thing. Last month an applicant actually set one on fire.

Posted by Ron W | May 15, 2008 11:57 PM

Randy,

I had the same reaction too. "I told him I'd call him in a week and left." Huh?

My first thought would be, "Look, is there anything I can do to help?" Chances are they'd say, "No, but thanks!" And it would sit really well with them.

Chances are, I'd push it if I really wanted the job, and I'd say, "I've the all day and nothing else planned. Let me start by grabbing a broom and I'll clean up the glass, this way you and your team can focus on getting the computers up and running, and I'm handy with lots of computer stuff too, so just holler."

Posted by Sparks | May 16, 2008 12:55 AM

Related to this, I have had two different potential employers who did not bother to contact me after the interview to let me know I did not get the job. In both cases I had driven at least an hour to interview with them and thought that the interview went ok. Professional courtesy should be to contact the person via form letter or phone call to let them know that they were not hired.

Hear, hear. Back in 2002, I was laid off after 11 years at one company and seeing how the job market had changed was a real eye-opener, and this was one of the things that I discovered; you're called in for an interview, it goes ok, and you never hear from them again. No phone call turning you down, not even an email or postcard. The first time this happened, I was quite surprised, but over the last five years, it has happened to me so often that is now routine. Whatever happened to professional courtesy?

Posted by OregonMuse | May 16, 2008 9:32 AM

The interviews I hated the worst were the ones where it was obvious that the job had already been filled internally and they had just posted it because of an internal policy or due to equal opportunities requirements.
I have had several over the years where I was fully qualified and had the experience and the interview lasted less than three minutes.
If you see a really good job posted in the newspaper, it is often just there for legal reasons.
All my jobs have been through personal contacts.

One other tip for job seekers, when ever you can do an end-run around HR, DO IT.
I got one engineering position by calling the engineering department directly. HR kept telling me they were not hiring. I called HR back with a fake Ebonics accent and they told we they were hiring.

Posted by smg45acp | May 16, 2008 10:55 AM

If you see a really good job posted in the newspaper, it is often just there for legal reasons. All my jobs have been through personal contacts.

Most of my jobs have come via newspaper ads. I may be unique in this regard.

Posted by OregonMuse | May 16, 2008 12:18 PM

Mike G

"Anyway, there's a lot to be said for it-- if you can handle the insecurity. I probably couldn't if paying the rent depended on whether or not I had a good month. I'm sort of more in the save-for-college-and-retirement/take a great vacation dept., so it's okay."

Hey thanks!

It's something I'm thinking about lately. And this definitely adds more to the discussion.

Posted by Edward Royce | May 16, 2008 12:58 PM

Like Ron W. I do the techincal portion of interviews hiring for technical training type positions. We get piles of resumes with years of qualifications I then give them a simple test of the software that any anyone with more than a months worth of usage should be able to finish in 5-10 minutes. Most cannot get past the first step, I then thank them for thier time.

Best interview I gave was a saturday where we flew a guy in. Since it was summer Saturday I had the usual busy schedule with kids etc.. So I showed up with the dog while in shorts and a T-shirt. The guy did an outstanding technical presentation, things that most people take a year to learn. Hired him on the spot. We still laugh about him freaking out when I showed up.

Posted by Dave | May 16, 2008 5:16 PM

Like Ron W. I do the techincal portion of interviews hiring for technical training type positions. We get piles of resumes with years of qualifications I then give them a simple test of the software that any anyone with more than a months worth of usage should be able to finish in 5-10 minutes. Most cannot get past the first step, I then thank them for thier time.

Best interview I gave was a saturday where we flew a guy in. Since it was summer Saturday I had the usual busy schedule with kids etc.. So I showed up with the dog while in shorts and a T-shirt. The guy did an outstanding technical presentation, things that most people take a year to learn. Hired him on the spot. We still laugh about him freaking out when I showed up.

Posted by Dave | May 16, 2008 5:17 PM

@Lewy

I almost added this very point to my post to preempt the notion of naivete on my part. Your points are well made. But there would be no need to grant him access to /root to engage an extra set of eyes and hands to inspect the physical infrastructure and help clean-up the mess.

Posted by Randy | May 16, 2008 8:21 PM

"One of the most common mistakes I see prospective employees make when I talk to them is they assume the interview is about them.

It's not. It's about me.

Oh, sure, we're talking about them, and we'll discuss pay, benefits, opportunity for growth, etc. But what I really want to know is what they're doing to do for me if I hire them."

As a job seeker, I actually agree with you. I understand that from the interviewer's perspective, the interview's objective is to find out what the candidate offers the company and whether or not s/he will be a good fit there.

However, I've had interviews where the entire conversation consisted of me fielding questions about my experience, personality, or what I'd do in such-and-such a scenario. I've asked a couple of token questions, thanked the interviewer, and left. On the drive home, it suddenly dawns on me that I have absolutely no idea of what I'll be doing if hired (beyond a vague job description in the help wanted section), or some other glaring detail like work schedule, # of hours, or location of the assignment.

Interviewers should appreciate the fact that the candidate is there not necessarily to "get that job" but rather to find out if it's right for him. Sufficient time should be left at the end for him to ask questions about his potential expectations, or better still, offer him a narrative at the beginning which outlines the full scope of the position. I've had interviewers cut me off after one question at the end, evidently in some kind of hurry to get me out the door.

Lastly, I'd like to know why it's considered such bad form to ask up-front what the payrate is. Yeah yeah, the interviewer wants to know what the candidate is bringing. I get that part, but the salary is (or should be) a fair question. I think a candidate ought to be able to find this out, if only to determine whether or not he'll be able to pay his monthly bills on what the employer is offering.

Posted by Matt | May 18, 2008 1:31 AM

When someone asks "Where do you see yourself in 5 years?", the answer should be:

"Face down in a ditch outside Las Vegas."

Posted by Dietrich | May 18, 2008 6:06 PM

Megan,

No, I-banking.

Posted by David | May 20, 2008 12:57 PM