Slashdot Mirror
Making Sure Interviews Don't Turn Into Free Consulting
We've talked in the past about what kind of questions should be asked of potential developer hires, and how being honest in exit interviews probably isn't worth the potential damage to your career. We're also familiar with the tricky questions some interviewers like to throw at people to test their thinking skills, and the questionable merits of gauging somebody's skillset through a pointlessly obtuse math problem. But there are also shady employers who conduct interviews to try to mine your knowledge and experience to find free solutions to their current problems. An actual job may or may not be on the table, but if they can get what they need from you before hiring, then at the very least your bargaining position will have gotten worse. Have you dealt with situations like this in the past? Since you can't know for sure the interviewer's intentions, it's tough to provide an answer demonstrating your abilities without solving their problem. "Before asking about the fixes they’ve tried, start by acknowledging the depth of the problem and find out whether the manager has the resources to solve it. Then, just like a consultant, use their answers to highlight your experience and explain the approach you’d take." You could also try explaining how you've solved similar problems, which won't necessarily help them, but will demonstrate your value. Of course, one of the biggest challenges is determining when somebody is getting a little too specific with their interview questions. What red flags should people keep an eye out for?
"Before asking about the fixes they’ve tried, start by acknowledging the depth of the problem and find out whether the manager has the resources to solve it. Then, just like a consultant, use their answers to highlight your experience and explain the approach you’d take." You could also try explaining how you've solved similar problems, which won't necessarily help them, but will demonstrate your value. Of course, one of the biggest challenges is determining when somebody is getting a little too specific with their interview questions.
Is this serious? Here's a big red warning sign for me: if my job can be jeopardized by twenty minutes of talking, I'm probably in the wrong industry. I can tell you how to implement a solution but it's the actual work and planning and care that should be paid for cash money.
What red flags should people keep an eye out for?
Here's a red flag: What company out there is so full of morons that they go to interviewees for direction? Man, if I ever got that feeling in an interview, I wouldn't want to work for them anyway and I'd walk away laughing when they try to turn small talk into a business plan! Is this why "consulting" is so stupid? They can have all the free advice they want, it's still going to shit out half way through when they go, "Okay we have hadoop and lucene, what was that 'blur' thing he was talking about?" or "Okay, we've built a rails app with the generator and scaffolds ... now what did he say about creating database migrations?" and on and on.
I mean, are there actually people out there that feel their job can be compromised by handing over thirty minutes of talking to a potential employer? The only thing I'd be worried about is if they started asking me to name names for other people they could hire.
My work here is dung.
unpaid internships can be the same and the office boy ones where are just doing copy's / coffee are more like general labor at $0 hr.
This whole premise of this question is idiotic... why would a company go through all the trouble to interview someone for a free hour of consulting? And what job could possibly be valid that could be "filled" by getting a random applicant to answer a question?
but your gaining such valuable knowledge... ...how to operate a RICOH copier... How to use the K-Cup interface... ...How to not make yourself useful...
only programmers and IT geeks would be so conceited as to even think this is a possibility.
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
Yeah, that's not going to happen in the real world, because it would require their pre-interview screening process to be so good as to effectively select, without an interview, the people whom it would be worth their while to get free consulting from under the guise of an interview.
I think the goal is to avoid wasting your time waiting to see if they're going to offer you a job, or to avoid accepting a job by a company like that if they do make an offer.
Um, yeah, no. Conversely you might have just sat through a potentially great job interview acting like you think you've got a royal flush and being careful not to show it. Yeah ... I'm not taking that risk. If you ask me in a job interview "How do you solve X" I am just going to turn on the firehose and let you have it to show you that I've got ideas for solving problems, I can openly confidently communicate said solutions well and I have dealt with problems like this in the past. If you can write all that down fast enough and follow through on something that normally takes a team six months to implement then good for you, you deserve that hail Mary pass that you somehow caught. Good luck on building a career off of hilarious asshattery like that. Your life must be "Weekend at Bernies" nine to five.
My work here is dung.
Indicate that they are only getting a trial level of your intelligence for the interview period and if they wish production levels of sobriety they will have to pay.
...like the time I was asked to code a PHP JSON to XML interpreter while the interviewer watched? Without using existing libraries...
spilling knowledge like a colander is generally beneficial for my reception, reputation and employment.
This is silly... It's like a car mechanic who will not diagnose your problem and starts talking about his skills and expertise. Most places give you a free quote to have you as a customer. Lawyers and doctors charge for the first consult too and you could take that approach by *BEING* a consultant rather than interviewing for a job. Or you could tell the interviewer to fuck off as opposed to taking your hour of consulting (worth $100 or so for a decently salaried position) and considering that an investment into your job hunt. Of course, if you are looking for a job, your time is probably worth far less to you, so make a grown up judgement call as to whether the odds of getting a job are worth taking the insurmountable risk of *gasp* working for free *gasp*!
Cheers!
Atheist: Buddhist in a Prius
I just spent six long days to prove my skills for a linux developer job. The home assignment was interesting and not trivial to solve. It did make me think they were fishing for a better algorithm.
I sent in a working program. They liked it and offered a job.
I ended up accepting a different offer, but it was a fun challenge. If they can use it in their product development, more power to them. My time wasn't wasted; it landed me a job offer, which gave me confidence to negotiate the parameters of the other job offer.
It's not a red flag, but maybe a white flag - in that there's no problem. I've conducted a lot of interviews at my current job and some of my coworkers think it's humorous to give the candidate a hypothetical question which is actually the reality in the office. I honestly don't think they're hoping to get useful information out of the candidate, they're just trying to see if the candidate suggests doing what they did, or at least having a good laugh with them about their suggestion which we might have tried and failed. In short, maybe you're jumping to conclusions.
Does it really seem likely that a company would take the time to go through resumes and hold interviews just for the purpose of extracting "free" information from interviewees about their specific problems? Or does it seem more likely that a company would ask interviewees about their specific problems so that they can hire the one who has the best solution to it?
When I get asked specific questions in interviews, I'm happy to give the best answers that I can give.
A company I used to work for placed an ad for a consultant to "fix a bug" in their code.
They stated that the contract would last between 1 day and 6 months, depending on how long it took to fix that one bug.
I'm sure that whatever consultant they eventually hired was totally honest about how long it actually took him to find and fix the bug.
I'm also sure it took no less than 6 months.
This happened to me several years ago. I was a board level design and test veteran and was interviewing at large chip company, one of the major players. First phone interview I got asked several questions and was told my answer seemed overly elaborate and they were curious why I suggested the more complicated this over the less complicated that. I went through my rationale and the interviewer said I brought up a dozen issues they never thought of and I should have a second phone interview. Second phone interview I basically reviewed everything I said before with 4 of their engineers who all recommended and on-site interview. A week and change later I was out in California for a two day interview. First day we talked about experience and a bunch of other things and signed some NDAs. The next day they were showing some preliminary board schematics and their test plans. I pretty much red marked 80% of their board as being a poor layout, made dozens of recommendations and then reviewed their test plan again making an unbelievable number of suggestions. I was told to expect an offer any day. A week went by, no response from the manager. made several attempts to contact I was directed to HR who said I was no longer under consideration.
Fast forward about 18 months and I see on MySpace( this was pre-FB) a friend is working in that group. I give him a call we chat about the design and he sends over the board schematics and it's probably 98% what I drew up.
I could easily imagine a potential employer reasoning that you can't have a better test than try you out with the real deal. Hard to fault that logic. And just interview people as an ongoing, ever-changing consulting source? You know how cost-inefficient that would be compared to just hiring someone? There's a reason why job-searching sites exist and are a viable business - it costs time and money to find candidates. And finally, even if they get a freebie from you - were you planning on somehow monetizing it yourself?
In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.
This is actually a pretty common problem when you are a contractor and have to discuss the project enough to develop an accurate quote. Just earlier this afternoon, I had to tell a potential client that I couldn't continue to talk to them unless it was under a paid contract. I had probably spent 2+ hours of phone time and 6 hours of review/email time to develop the quote for them. Damn bottom feeders.
I never tell them they can email .jpg directly without pasting them in an MS .doc, they have to pay first !
for half the price they get to know how to send uncompressed bitmaps.
How about those who interview solely to get your references to get contacts to sell them something? Temp agencies seem really bad at that.
But there are also shady employers who conduct interviews to try to mine your knowledge and experience to find free solutions to their current problems. An actual job may or may not be on the table, but if they can get what they need from you before hiring, then at the very least your bargaining position will have gotten worse.
Why would you even want to work for someone like that? It's a warning, be glad they warned you before you got hired into a miserable situation. That company has low probability of success.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
So what if they are trying to get free consulting, giving a full answer is still your best bet.
If they are indeed trying to get you to solve their problem during the interview, they clearly don't want to hire anybody. If you don't solve it, they'll ask the next guy. Nothing lost, but nothing gained.
If it is just a test question, you are definitely hurting your chances of being hired by not displaying your full knowledge, though.
Trying to fix problems with interviews is not a particularly cost-effective way to do things. The company will waste HR time selecting people, and also waste the time of other programmers to oversee the fix and confirm that it will actually fix the problem. If someone can fix a hard two-year-old problem in the space of an interview, then it's probably a good idea to keep that person to fix other problems.
If time is so valuable that spending an hour or two in an interview is not worth it if the application is not successful, why waste that time on the interview in the first place?
Strictly speaking, this wasn't an interview; but I think it applies.
Many many many moons ago, a friend asked me if I would be interested in setting up a Novell network for his employer. I put together a quote and sent it off. He called me up, and said that he needed a detailed walk-through of the work involved in order to explain the quote to his boss. I explained everything that was necessary. A couple of weeks go by, and I haven't heard anything so I call him. After learning what needed to be done, he decided he could do it himself; and that was the route they were taking. Lost a 'friend', but gained a cautionary tale; I think I came out ahead. (Yes, Jeff; this story is about you.)
-- This sig is only a test. If this were a real sig it would say something witty. --
Then really it's more of a help desk ticket. I suppose they could glean some very general information in that time and maybe get some direction on what to internet search for. But I find it hard to believe anything approaching true "consulting" could really take place in an interview's amount of time.
I encounter this kind of attitude all the time: People who want to fight tooth and nail to hold on to whatever vital information they think they have, so they can't be replaced. They want to make sure nobody else learns how to do it, because otherwise they think they'd be laid off.
Thing is? They are often right, because they aren't very useful outside of that.
Personally I think it is silly. My boss always says we IT types should be trying to work ourselves out of a job. He doesn't mean he wants to get rid of us (he's a tech guy, not a PHB) just that we, including him, should always be working for better automation, working to solve problem, working to streamline and make service better.
The thing is that won't end up with us being out of a job because there's always more to do. There are things people would like us to do, but we don't have time for, and if we free up more time we can move on to that.
Not everyone operates that way though. They want to hold on to whatever little niche of knowledge they have, believing that is all that makes them valuable.
Geordi is smart. He will make them go.
How narcissistic do you have to be to believe that you lost the job because you just provided free consulting to them and fixed their problem for them?
Went to an interview once where they asked me for 3 ideas of how to improve their program. I simply wrote: I'll share my ideas with you after you've hired me. They didn't want to play that way so I didn't get the job. They didn't get my ideas. Pretty sure Joe Politician's nephew got the job and a boatload of other peoples' ideas.
That's nothing. I was once asked to design & implement a space shuttle software in 30 minutes, which I did while undercover in communist Russia stealing their top secret documents. I also had time to prove that N=NP, create a simple script that passed the Turing test and create a machine learning method, that can predict exact date and time when you die with 100% accuracy. Anyway, this free consulting thing is a joke from Dilbert, so I would suggest reading less comics :D
A worse, and more common, situation is when a company hires someone to work on an upgrade then coincidentally decides to not keep them after their probation period.
You know exactly which series I'm referring to, you dirty perv!
I'm a pharmaceutical scientist and have personally experienced this last year. A biotechnology company flew me across the country and picked my brain to explain how to setup and analyze and characterize proteins by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry. Different people asked me the same questions over and over again inquiring about setting up the mass spectrometer acquisition parameters. I even tried to explain other relevant experience, they didn't want to hear it, all they wanted was to know how to acquire the data to identify as many proteins as possible in a series of samples.
"your bargaining position will have gotten worse"
If you just solved a real world problem for a company in a interview and made them lots of money, you bargaining position has just gotten a whole lot better.
If the only work they needed doing can be completed in a 30 minute interview than they simply do not and never had a job to offer you.
And no one would actually do this, it would be an incredibly huge waste of time. You actually think that some company is going to interview 20 people until they get the guy that is capable of solving their problem in 30 minutes? They have just spent a week of work getting a 30 minute answer.
If a problem is solvable in a interview setting then the company could of just spent 30 minutes posting a detailed description on some forum somewhere, where they would of gotten an even better and more detailed answer than they could ever of hoped for from an interviewee.
If you provide the answer to a current real world problem in an interview and do not get the job, then it is probably because someone else gave a better response.
And do you really think playing games with the interviewer is going to improve your chances of getting a job? If the person asked you a question they want an answer to that question, not to another question.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Seriously, if your "product" doesn't meet that standard then you will never cut it as a consultant. Just enforce the "one" rule.
Anyone who'd refuse to share technical information during an interview will eventually try to hoard their knowledge later and that isn't anyone you want to work with.
Any company relying on some random job applicants for free consultation and taking them seriously is stone cold retarded and deserves the damage they'll inevitably suffer.
If they already know they're interviewing decent people then presumably they're only between jobs for a very brief time and wouldn't be daft enough to act as a doormat :P
Story is silly.
It seems perfectly legitimate that if an employer is hoping to hire somebody to solve a particular problem (“Our database is really slow and we need a lot of help optimizing it. How would you proceed with that?”) they would ask a lot of questions and focus on the problem. Running a fake interview seems like an incredibly rare edge-case to me. It’s like getting an interview at a publisher and concluding afterwards that “They just want to steal all my great ideas for Doctor Who FanFics!”
Often at interview you'll be asked about something that is at the top of the interviewer's stack of issues. I've blown it many times by being honest about the size of hole/ difficulty of getting out/ importance of not letting it happen again or in the first place. The idea that there's a quick solution that will bulldoze their plan will also piss them off.
I had an unpleasant experience interviewing with Google that left a bad taste in my mouth.
I have a Ph.D. in Information Science, have worked professionally outside the university as an academic researcher, have published multiple books and peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and hold a technology-related patent. In research (contrary to the claims above that idea misappropriation isn't a problem), very often the idea itself is indeed the most valuable thing: out of the infinite attack vectors, which one you would choose to address the problem?
At my interview I was asked a number of generic questions, then suddenly was asked a very specific question about approaches to e-mail spam filtering. I gave what in my opinion were some pretty good ideas based on my recent academic work in the area. The mid-20s semi-anonymous interviewer (semi-anonymous because Google interviewers never give you their last name or a business card, the arrogant jerks) took diligent notes, and I never heard from them again.
In pure code-monkey programming-related jobs, responses to interview questions may not have much value to the employer, but in research-related fields I think companies can and do freely misappropriate the ideas there. After all, what have they got to lose? Nothing.
I'd be interested in hearing if my experience is commonplace.
One interview I had amused me. On paper it looked okay, a small art dealership was looking for a combined sysadmin/Perl programmer which was pretty much what I was doing then, and the pay was significantly more than I was on at my current place and as I was getting bored in the current job anyway I thought I'd go and have a chat.
Went to the interview and it was one of those where the interviewer wasn't actually technical himself. He had a friend write a page of simple technical questions which I answered without any trouble, also corrected one of the answers he had. The interviewer seemed happy and we started talking about what the job actually involved, and here it started to go wrong. He wanted a basic browse-only shopfront, no actual payment, with basic message board capability, and some everyday web/email/DNS handling. He did vaguely ask how I'd do this but not in any detail at all. Listening to him I knew that I'd be bored by day two, but I did actually like the guy and knew that what he wanted really didn't need a full-time employee. I explained to him that these were basically things which could be done by using pre-existing software with a month of effort to get it up and running in the first place, and a day or so a month afterwards to maintain it. I jotted down the names of some software and companies that could help him, and told him what to ask them for.
He was genuinely amazed. He thought that all of this web-stuff was so complex that it'd be a full-time task to keep his website running, thinking that every new art piece he added to the catalogue would need an entire new page to be written for it. Finding out about CMS was a revelation, and one he was grateful for, and all this took less time than the interview was scheduled for.
In the end he went with one of the companies I'd recommended to him, they did ecommerce stuff and this was bread and butter for them, he was up and running in two weeks with everything he needed, as he let me know in an email. As for me I didn't have a new job but I felt good about myself, and the fact the chap had basically ended the 'interview' by giving me a few weeks worth of wages for saving him a lot in the long run was quite nice too.
404 Not Found: No such file or resource as '.sig'
Hey don't mock the how not to make yourself useful skill. It's an important Corporate survival tool that will often lead to promotion.
There are many reasons why it could not possibly happen. Last of which was an employee sending you documents that contain trade secrets.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
If a company needs to "mine" their interviewees for knowledge that particular company isn't going to last long anyway, no harm, no foul.
... and you can solve our problems, why would I want to boot you, potentially sending you to one of our competitors, instead of keeping you and making you solve more problems for us?
If I can solve a potential employer's current issues in just an hour, just imagine what I could do for them in a month or a year.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
sheesh!
It was just to find out about a project and give them a quote. It turns out that I solved their issue in about 30 minutes, including chit chat, and told them everything they needed to know to fix their problem. I even made notes on their materials for them.
You know what I charged them? Nothing. I told them if they had to come back and have me do everything, it would be about $X, but that I thought that they had enough information to do it with the people they already had on board. They're a client I'm unlikely to ever see again because this is an unusual problem for them. They're not going to be repeat freeloaders, and doing this work full-up won't get me a bigger job with them later.
I figure that if I can solve your entire problem in 30 minutes, it's not something that requires my skill or justifies my fees. I'd rather have a happy non-client telling their friends that I was extremely helpful (yes, I made them promise not let people know I just gave them the info for free), than clients who just spent a healthy dime because they felt they had no other option. I do have "regulars" who have stupid issues like this on a recurring basis. I charge them full rack rate every time.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
As a consultant, there was a brief period where I would have an existing client start asking for some very specific information about "how" to do things, like instructions on how to add users to Active Directory. Eventually, I got over the instinctive insecurity of giving away job secrets, especially when it's stuff that they could just google up answers for anyway, and found that promptly providing it only serves to strengthen the business relationship.
I haven't gone to an interview in ages, but I can't imagine getting too ruffled over one where they would basically be asking me how I'd fix a particular problem. Even if they came right out and said "we have a problem with this application and are looking to hire someone who can hit the ground running with ideas. What would you do to fix it?" The fact is, they aren't going to retain very much of anything that gets said anymore than I would retain asking a mechanic what he'd do to fix my hypendupulator pump. He get as detailed as he wants, and it wouldn't get me very far.
wasn't there an article about a tech company in florida that did 'hardcore' interviews where they flew you to their office for 2 weeks of invensive interviews ie free labour?
If a gig entails solving a problem that can be solved in the time-frame of an interview it wasn't much of a gig anyway.
Chalk it up to marketing. I actively encourage people to call me for help. Anything I can do in less than a couple of hours I don't bother to bill for. Billing is more work than the "work".
I have been ripped off for free consulting while trying to sell scientific software, but that's an entirely different problem. I still don't know the answer to that one.
Jeff is that you?
In early 1989, I was called for an interview at CERN. The guy who interviewed me was called Tim. He asked me to call him Timbo. The interview went normally and then Timbo took me to the CERN cafeteria for lunch. I told him about my idea about taking hypertext and connecting it to the Transmission Control Protocol and domain name system ideas andâ"ta-da!â"you all know what happened next.
I went on a few without realizing it.
they asked some tech question and I could tell they really didn't know how to approach this problem and solve it with good interoperability (that was a key; and most always should be). I gave them a proper answer (it was right up my alley and was pretty obvious to me) and the hiring mgr did seem to like how I solved it.
of course, I never did hear back from them.
the worst, though, is the 'its not a job... FOR YOU' interview. they full well know they want to hire an h1b for cheap and they waste my time bringing me out on a physical interview then give me a bogus turn-down after I've spent hours there. only a few times did I see this happen but I'm quite sure that its a non-zero occurrence. some interviews were just too spot-on and the turn-down was too synthetic. it just did not make sense.
some phone screens have people that 'get it' and you can ask them frankly if this is a real job or not. watch how they handle it and answer it; how they react is often more important than the answer they give.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs71.htm
The Test For Unpaid Interns
There are some circumstances under which individuals who participate in “for-profit” private sector internships or training programs may do so without compensation. The Supreme Court has held that the term "suffer or permit to work" cannot be interpreted so as to make a person whose work serves only his or her own interest an employee of another who provides aid or instruction. This may apply to interns who receive training for their own educational benefit if the training meets certain criteria. The determination of whether an internship or training program meets this exclusion depends upon all of the facts and circumstances of each such program.
The following six criteria must be applied when making this determination:
The internship, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to training which would be given in an educational environment;
The internship experience is for the benefit of the intern;
The intern does not displace regular employees, but works under close supervision of existing staff;
The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the intern; and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded;
The intern is not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the internship; and
The employer and the intern understand that the intern is not entitled to wages for the time spent in the internship.
If all of the factors listed above are met, an employment relationship does not exist under the FLSA, and the Act’s minimum wage and overtime provisions do not apply to the intern. This exclusion from the definition of employment is necessarily quite narrow because the FLSA’s definition of “employ” is very broad. Some of the most commonly discussed factors for “for-profit” private sector internship programs are considered below.
This happened to me at Zynga unintentionally. We started talking scale, I made suggestions and then the notepads came out. Through "sources," I learned they implemented my ideas. Not as bad as it could have been, I ultimately turned them down.
... might as well send them a bill for the walk-through at a much higher rate. And then go the small claims route. There was some transfer of know-how, and you deserve to be compensated for it.
He'd been part of the IBM laserprinter project and Apple's printer group interviewed him essentially to pick his brains. He cottoned to that pretty quickly and essentially told the HR person running the 'interview process' that this manager was full of crap. Apple had big egos back in the 90s. With the return of iSteve, that changed. The Apple I contracted at in 1995 was nowhere close to the company it was in 2005.
Then again, there was a reason you never heard of a consumer grade LW-killer from IBM. The PS interpeter inside sucked. Bigtime. My friend used to joke about it's page print rate--When it positively absolutely has to get there overnight. Yep. Not much of a team player.
This definitely happened to me. In the late 80s I worked for a small startup designing a satellite image processing system, this went on for about 3 years and the thing achieved some success in sales terms. I started looking round for a better paying job, I got an interview in a big uk aerospace firm a couple of hundred miles away. At the interview, the first 2-3 hours I had the usual iq tests, career discussion, walk round the department, then just as I thought it was drawing to a close the guy says now there are some people who want to talk to you and I was sent into a room with two of their senior engineers. For the next hour these two grilled me on every aspect of the design of the system I had been working on in the startup. I got increasingly fed up and eventually refused to answer any more questions. I never got a job offer from them. A couple of months after this I got another job in a completely different company. Then about a year later I heard from one of the people in the startup that I was still in touch with that the big aerospace firm had launched a competitive product. Yes, its you I'm talking about, BAE Filton.
A long time ago I interviewed for Reuters in London. The advertised job was paying well over the odds, and the benefits were very generous. I am actually fairly well-known in my field, and one of the pre-interview requests was to bring along copies of books I had written...
I started at 11:00. The day proceeded in stages, with different teams of people being brought in each hour. Each team had a load of detailed questions, which I answered as best I could. They took copious notes - sometimes asking me to slow down. I finally finished at 16:30.
Then they asked me if they could retain the copies of the books I had brought from the initial print runs for a while. I said OK.
After 2 weeks I started pressing them about the job. They didn't seem to want to say anything. After 4 weeks they finally told me that I hadn't got it. I asked for my books back, and they told me that they had lost them....
Consultants charge several hundred an hour to offer advice. Prospective employees will do it for free. Beware of the shonky cheapskate small business types.The point of the interview is supposed to be for them to get a feel for you and whether you can do the job. That's all. Once that is established, leave. Limit your interview to an hour - or as short as practical. If they want to talk for longer they are just picking your brain. If they reassure you they are not picking your brain, then they are. If you get a vibe you are dealing with a shonky or a cheapskate, best have nothing to do with them even if they do offer you a job. It'll only be trouble down the road. And if you are desperate and need the job that bad, you will still get trouble down the road. Find a decent employer to work for instead.
> Re:If you can solve it in the interview who cares?You're a sucker, a loser, a wuss, a gutless wonder with no sense of pride or self-worth. It's good to be nice to people who are nice to you, but being nice to people trying to fuck you over is just pathetic. Stop being a doormat. You'll be happier for it.
I used to work semi-conductor and am one of a handful of technicians that have worked on the latest and greatest DRIE (deep reactive ion etch) tools on the market. My old company was the first in the world to get this machine to work in production scale. My linked-in profile list the maintenance school for said tool. I have had several phone interviews where in the middle of the interview the questions get very specific, i.e. "How do you maintain a good edge profile after chamber cleans?" or "What is the best method to center the cathode?". Usually after I answer these questions the interview ends within a couple of minutes, and no I am giving the right answer, I was part of the team of guys that came up with the right answer.
In the late 1990s I had a job where I was a Unix system admin and our group needed to hire a replacement for the guy who left. The job required some marginal Unix/Linux user knowledge but most of the work would be repairing and building out PCs for our test group. Our PCs weren't the best and needed constant maintenance. The previous 2 guys who held the job were nuts. Guy number 1 was bipolar and told us on his first day of work that he was bipolar and that he saw no need to take medicine for it. It ended up being 6 months of hell where we basically had a guy who alternated between being a crybaby and Captain Angry All The Time. He left us to become some other company's problem, but we foolishly brought in his replacement before he left and had him train the new guy. Much to our surprise, he became BFFs with guy number 2 and he poisoned guy number 2 against our group. Guy number 2 basically had a permanent hostile attitude towards our group until he left us for another company. So we let guy number 2 leave before we ever started to look for his replacement because we were not going to repeat the previous mistake of letting a departing employee have a negative influence on his replacement.
We interviewed several people and we actually flew a guy in from another state who seemed promising for an interview. I don't remember exactly what it was, but we had some ongoing problem related to our PCs that neither of the 2 previous crazy guys could ever solve. So after we interviewed the guy, my manager brought him into his office and asked him about the problem. He got it fixed on the spot for us within 5 minutes. He was hired that day. His ability to fix that ongoing problem on the spot clinched it for him. He was a fantastic employee for us. So while I'm sure that maybe some sleazebag companies are just trying to get free help, trust me, you don't want to work for them anyway. Some companies may just be using it to test your abilities and if you can solve their problem, you'll get the job. I've seen it firsthand.
Awhile ago, I answered an ad and took an online test for a position where I'd be sole sysadmin and support person for a camp in the mountains. Terms were $20 per hour and room and board, but I'd get snowed in reguarly. I aced the online test, and went up for my interview. On arrival, I was told to be subtle, as the person I was replacing was still working there, and didn't know he was leaving. Welcome!
After the interview with the owner (old lesson: Sole Proprietors are crazy) I met with various high level users, to discuss their problems. In each case, I suggested a solutions, some of which were implemented then and there.
Not a place I was eager to work, but I'd been out of work for a long time, and they were eager to have me. Fortunately, I took a position which payed a great deal more, wasn't an insane environment, and I never looked back. The camp did hold the position for me for quite some time, in case the other job didn't work out. Just a data point about the "working interview."
Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.
CGI/special effects company that wanted to branch out into web development gave me an 'interview' about a drupal development job. Got there, they talked to me about the 'job' (they wanted a drupal based booking system). Spent the next hour talking about how I'd go about implementing it, why it was possible under Drupal and commented on some prototypes they'd drawn out. Generally felt like the 'interview' was going well, agency afterwards said they'd been really impressed with me and would 'certainly' get in contact.
Naturally I never heard from them again and I then realised I had wasted an afternoon driving to this place to give them a valuable consultation session that they didn't have to pay a penny for. Was naive in retrospect but I've been poor interviewee in the past (incredibly shy which a lot of people mistake for lack of interest/motivation) and was a bit too keen to impress.
It's illegal in the UK to offer an interview when there's no job available but it's next to impossible to prove (they just say a client backed out or they decided to go a different direction).
Lots of people think this is stupid... Until it happens to them.
You underestimate how valuable a sanity check on a project can be. Someone who can tell you that they're using the right software, the right methods for some things, that using xyz for abc isn't a good idea and that 123 would be better suited to it. They can get professional feedback on designs and processes etc.
Yeah a full time consultant working for a month then providing advice when needed is better but they also cost a large amount of money.
> We're also familiar with the tricky questions some interviewers
> like to throw at people to test their thinking skills, and the
> questionable merits of gauging somebody's skillset through a
> pointlessly obtuse math problem.
I mostly agree that this is questionable but, depending on how and why its done, I do think there is some merrit. Not so much as a test of thinking skills, but just to see how a person deals with an obtuse problem.
I used to give people a quick, but obtuse code test, asking them to read something devious I had come up with late one night.
Only two people ever "Solved it", and did so in rather fantastic fashion, giving me example inputs and outputs. Thing is, we were not interviewing for programer jobs, we were interviewing for sysadmin, and so we were not specifically looking for high skill coders, but.... some middling ones who can jump in and debug an issue are useful... and people who can admit when they don't know things are even more so.
The entire test was, in my mind, looking for 2 things:
1. Do they actually understand the mechanics of the language that they claimed? Its not the most common thing to see, but I have definitely handed the test to a couple of people who had no business advertising that they knew PERL (I had more than the PERL test, but it was the most common and my favorite).
2. How do they approach a hard problem? I always considered asking questions and trying to talk through it a plus. That is questions that don't make me question #1... a question like "What does split do?" would be bad....
Whereas "I don't see what this split is doing, it only has one argument and isn't being assigned to anything?"* , is good. I am not trying to test your knowledge of the minor gotchas of perl syntax, knowing enough to know thats strange tells me alot. Knowing that you have no issue admitting you are not a guru and being able to ask pertenant questions is every bit as important as technical knowledge and problem solving skills.
* Yes the PERL test contained the line "split //;". I once was given a candidates resume on the way into the interview, leading everyone to break down laughing as I handed my perl test to one of the well known O'Rielly Perl book authors.... he was one of the 2 to solve it commenting "Interesting use of split, we will talk about that later."
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
I was doing DBA work for Vertica database systems through a consulting company. We had a phone interview with one potential client and it turned pretty quickly to them wanting to solve some very specific issues over the phone for them for free.
I fell back to something like "these problems are very complicated. We've done this type of work in the past. I'd have to look at the specifics of your case." I gave them a good outline of the approach I would take.
They became irritated, in my opinion, and kept pushing.
I am convinced they ran into a problem and wanted me to work for free. Best case scenario, they ran into a problem and wanted absolutely no doubt we could help them. Regardless, I wasn't comfortable actually doing the work I was interviewing for in the interview. Proof I know what I'm doing is different.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
My reaction to a situation like this is to explain my relevant experience. Nothing more. If they insist on focusing on the problem at hand, then my decision has been made and I would no longer want to work for that company. I recognize free consulting when I see it, it is highly inappropriate during an interview, and I did not spend a fortune on college education and work years in a distinguished career to give away solutions.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
While many commenters have blown off the original article as a scam, this kind of "intellectual theft" is pretty common in one-off, temporary, contract job situations.
For example, a few years back I had an "interview" for some subcontracting work with a former consulting firm I'd done some work for in the past. I needed any cash, so to ensure I got the work I ended up talking to them for an hour or more about about what I would do. The end client was there asking questions, listening and taking a few notes, etc., and I grew a little suspicious. By the end of the meeting, I had a feeling that I was being used for free consulting, but not having set a clear payment plan for my time up front, what could I do? In the end the client was so excited that they decided to do the work themselves after the meeting, based on the direction I had pushed them, and he decided I wasn't needed. The former colleague semi-apologized later, but I would've appreciated getting at least a one hour consulting fee (which they stiffed me on).
The moral of the story: Have a clear understanding UP FRONT that you will be billing for ANY time you give for ANY temp/contract work... Even for friends/former colleagues... If they're really pros/friends, they'll understand and pay up.
avoiding confidentiality agreements, at least for the first interview and maybe second, seems like a reasonable request. Shady people are often the most paranoid, if they are trying to steal consulting from you, its likely they assume you might be trying to steal something from them. To prevent that, they may make you sign a confidentiality agreement prior to or during the interview. In later interviews, it should be more easier to discern between a real interview process and a scam. At which point you should be able to use your best judgment in regards to signing any agreements.
This is hashrockets MO, except they work you for free for a week.
Client walks in with all their W-2s, 1099s, 1098-INT, 1098-T, 1099R and stock purchases and sales. After 45 minutes preparing supporting schedules for business mileage, medical expenses, home office, sales taxes, energy credits, business use of cell phone and internet, donations and other un-reimbursed business expenses, the client then informs they calculated the same refund amount on their own using free software and walk out.
First year doing IRS filings for the public after buying a practice three weeks ago but learning quickly to screen for freeloaders.
This is a tactic that's not just limited to interviews for tech positions, this is becoming a scourge amongst all service-based positions. My wife has twice been the victim of this, and she works in marketing/advertising. What happens is the interviewer says, "Here's a scenario, create a quick campaign slogan or copy to address the needs of the client," under the guise of "getting a feel for your skillset". So the candidate performs the work and then either doesn't get the job or gets a second "interview" in which they're asked to perform the same task, only this time with a bit more detail. Recruiters are well aware of this process and are asking their clients to notify them immediately when they're being asked to "provide examples". Your resume and experience (and in the case of the marketing people, their "book" of previous work), combined with more general job-specific questions should be enough to give a potential employer a good idea of your skills. The interview isn't actually about getting to know what you can do, it's more about gauging how you'll fit in with the corporate environment and the personalities on the team you'll be joining.
And make no mistake, having an interview candidate "solve" your issues for you isn't about the existing team being inept, it's purely a method of obtaining free labor.