I recently came across a TechCrunch article describing how the technical interview process needs to change. In a recent interview, a Google executive revealed that brainteasers turned out to be poor predictors of a person's future success at Google, which has many people reevaluating how they conduct their technical interviews. Mr. Evans takes this a step further, and points out how whole interviews are often focused on evaluating the wrong attributes of a candidate.
I completely agree with some of Mr. Evans' points. I also believe too often people waste time in interviews asking detailed technical questions, which can usually be done in a simple test where people can access their usual resources. I think interviewers should focus more on checking a candidate's ability to solve large problems and develop large scale projects. Even if they worked as part of a large team in the past, I like to see if they understand different elements of the project - how it is used, the system architecture, and where their piece fits in. Ultimately, I think businesses will benefit greatly from evaluating candidates in a manner that reflects their work rather than a school exam.
I completely agree with some of Mr. Evans' points. I also believe too often people waste time in interviews asking detailed technical questions, which can usually be done in a simple test where people can access their usual resources. I think interviewers should focus more on checking a candidate's ability to solve large problems and develop large scale projects. Even if they worked as part of a large team in the past, I like to see if they understand different elements of the project - how it is used, the system architecture, and where their piece fits in. Ultimately, I think businesses will benefit greatly from evaluating candidates in a manner that reflects their work rather than a school exam.
No comments:
Post a Comment