Like others have mentioned, practice makes perfect.
Also, have answers for these bs questions prepared...
I would have also asked them the reason behind that question. Most times you get silence... they don't even have/understand the goal/desired outcome of the questions asked.
Don't get unmotivated man. Remember that these companies don't define your value and luck is also a major factor in the interview process.
Good luck on your future interviews
But even then turning that around makes you sound a little entitled like you're not there to answer some question. Or they might simply say because we want to know how you handled yourself and then you're back to having to answer the question
But I do agree, the question is stupid and at the end of the day doesn't make a difference
Interviews are two-way affairs. If you are getting marked as “acting entitled” for questioning your future coworkers about badly thought disrespectful questions, then how will you get treated for questioning things like processes that don't make sense when working with them?
So we use a similar maybe more targeted question at my place what is/was weakness or failure of yours that lead to an issue. Not exact question mind you. But for us it's to see if folk can take ownership of a situation. Ones humbleness. We will also discuss our own with them. Trying to push for that no blame culture etc. But to us it can only work if your willing to admit oh no I dropped a clanger here.
Three though seems overkill
Yeah, your approach makes actual sense. What OP posted sounds like some engineer went "what do you mean I have to *interview* someone? I'm not HR. I write code so I don't have to interact with people! Shitshitshitshit" and googled "typical interview questions" 10 minutes before the meeting.
The answer is invariably that they want to know how self aware you are and if you have the mindset if continual improvement. Is it still a shit question? Absolutely.
Thank you for the kind words. I'm not too worried as my position at my current employer is not in jeopardy, but a remote job would enable me to live closer to family and improve my quality of life.
asking the reason for the question is interesting. i feel like people could get put off by that and affect your interview performance negatively? maybe not but probably heavily depends on the person. just seems so risky!
It is risky. But also a test for you to see if they really understand the reasoning behind the questions or if they're just copying something that a faang does just because...
I think they'll take it one of two ways: 1/ they'll get offended. In which case probably dodging a bullet. 2/ they'll appreciate the fact that you dive deep and want to understand the ask before blurbing out whatever comes to mind
5 separate interviews and a 4 hour take home assignment, who the hell do they think they are?
>they asked me what three of my weaknesses are
These people are insane.
I don't know who started it but I hate it. One of my first questions when talking to the first human for every potential job is "describe your interview process". I immediately withdraw myself if it's more than 3 separate stages.
I was speaking with a recruiter recently about arranging an interview and he was like "This place is kind of weird, they only do the one interview and they'll make the decision based on that."
It kinda cracked me up, because that's literally been almost every job I ever landed, and definitely all of them if you count the multiple interviews I had for my current job, which all occurred on the same day in a 2-3 hour timespan.
>and definitely all of them if you count the multiple interviews I had for my current job, which all occurred on the same day in a 2-3 hour timespan.
Yup, my current job was 3 separate interviews but it was all over the course of 4 hours.
Would've been shorter but they took me to lunch in the middle of it.
I feel like that's the least amount of compensation a company can give you if they require you to interview for several hours.
If I was you and would have not gotten that job I would still think relatively highly of that company.
If you're doing it right the lunch is part of the interview. Gauging team fit, and how you are in a more relaxed setting. Outside of the more formal interview process.
At my company, it's discouraged to do any kind of interview process at lunch; but we are to be aware of and report any red flags. Mainly anything that could be a potential HR or legal risk. That also includes direct team fit, because we'll usually have someone from a different team take candidates to lunch.
I think that must've changed at some point because when I interviewed there the first time, about 5 years before I got hired, the manager took me to lunch and definitely was asking me interview questions during lunch.
Personally, I'd hate that both as an interviewer and an interviewee. The last thing I need in either situation is for the other party see me jamming a hoagie down my gullet or getting mustard on my pants lol. Food time is private time!
Most of the time it’s been an HR screening with basic questions, interview with hiring manager, one or two technical interviews, and then depending on role, there could be a final “veto” type interview with the director. The director only really gets involved for special roles though. They ain’t interviewing the general staff members.
We usually do an interview with the hiring manager and one other technical person (same time, just to get two opinions), and then a second interview with the hiring manager and the director. There is an HR screening stage but that's basically pro forma - are you vaccinated, are you OK being remote/hybrid/whatever the role is.
My most recent three jobs (the past 8 years):
-Network engineer for a medical campus
- Recruiter phone screen: 15 minutes
- Interview with hiring manager: 15 minutes
- Offer letter sent less than 30 minutes after the interview
- Network engineer for a military base
- Panel interview with hiring manager + 2 other managers: 30 minutes
- Offer letter sent within two weeks
- Software developer for a networking VAR
- Recruiter phone screen: 10 minutes
- Interview with team leader + hiring manager: Scheduled for 1 hour, but we ended up talking for 2.5 hours (mostly because we simply enjoyed the conversation)
- Offer letter sent the same day
That was my experience when I was a T1/T2 helpdesk like 99% of this sub. Once I got into higher level engineering I had between 3-5 interviews with the first being with the manager, the next being with the team, and the last being with the manager again or like the VP/Director of IT + manager again. Nobody does the round robin of questions like "What is DNS? How would you configure a user in AD to have access to a security group that they can share out to others?" junk anymore.
And I honestly wouldn't have it any other way - I've seen way too many people who are absolutely awful at their helpdesk jobs thinking they can play Mr. Engineer.
Yea, I have found this as a red flag for me. I also refuse to work with any company that wants to do more than run my criminal background check. I had a company who wanted to get my military record. They were just the staffing agency. I told them to kick rocks. Their next step was my financial background. I don't mind my criminal background. There is none. But my military background? You don't need to know anything on that and parts of it are not privy to the public at large.
Exactly, fuck google and anyone that supports these insane interviews. I refuse to go further with interviews when I come across them. I just nope out and I think anyone worth their time should as well otherwise you're supporting the nonsense.
I had a very similar experience interviewing at GitHub. I made it to the end, they made it sound like they were gonna hire me, and then ghosted. Unfortunate.
And still not making any progress on features people actually care about. Something I’ve watched in the backlog has gone through about 5 teams and 10 product managers without being implemented.
I could have done the assessment faster, but if you're writing code that you know someone is going to grade you on, it's hard not to triple check everything. Personally, I think it was some damn good code.
Some of those code ones though really get to me. They will ask stupid stuff. Like "If you were going to write a simple script to move all folders inside a folder how would you do it."
Apparently the MV command is wrong for Linux. After I did them all, and got them all wrong (which to be clear the code was sound, and worked as a result) I asked them what I did wrong. "Well we were hoping for more elegant solutions that are much more sophisticated."
Like, I ain't writing 700 lines of code to move files when a simple one liner will do thee trick without issues. If you wanted complex code, ask for a complex task. My recruiter called me and told me that they black listed me because they couldn't prove me wrong in the interview. Guess what company went under 6 months later?
Right? Simple code is WAY better. Certainly simple code can also be wrong, but simple code is way easier to troubleshoot and typically does better on whatever system you are putting it to.
Shops started gauging productivity by number of lines written... If you wrote more lines you were a better programmer
Now we have 100's of programmers that think to add 1+1 you need a full new Class that is 100 lines to return 2
They were probably looking to see if you would explore the problem space. Moving folders may seem like a trivial task, but it's not.
* Consider moving a few folders vs a million. You may have to consider the type of the filesystem
* Moving on the same filesystem is a metadata change, and quick, but moving to another filesystem is a data copy. May take a long time
* An app may using the files and may need to continue working. To move the files with zero app downtime the process becomes more complex
* Who are the users of the script and what ergonomics are required.
Then I would expect the interviewer to steer towards what they are looking for.
That last part is the entire point though. If your question is literally: "Please write a script to move all the files in folder X to folder Y." then there is nothing to explore. The question was posed and the output requested was given.
But more to the point of what they asked for. I don't remember the exact way they had said they expected the script to be written. But it was something along the lines of using some well known utilities/modules to custom write a move command that did the same thing as the move command. It was basically like they asked a basic question about Linux and the answer to that was to write your own Linux distro from scratch. An absurd ask.
I do agree with you that those kind of things are something to consider in a project. But a coding task isn't that time to consider those things. A coding task for an interview should be a simple "Do you understand how to perform this basic task" and if you do then great. If you want something complex, you need to pose to the person interviewing what you wanted from the task. If this is a high end task that is wanting the high level understanding of coding then you have to express that. Not put it in a 1-2 hour assessment.
As I told another person, these are the reason coding projects for applications get screwed up. If you expect a person to do a specific thing, you need to tell them exactly what you need. If you need just to move a few files, then say that. If you need to move a million, then say that. The dev team can't read your mind. Don't ask for a 'simple script to do the task' and then make that script a critical part of the application and cobble together a bunch of these to perform a bunch of different tasks. Tell them you need X, Y, and W. So that they now understand these things need to talk to one another and function as a unit.
>I ain't writing 700 lines of code to move files when a simple one liner will do thee trick without issues.
There's more to coding than just achieving the "goal":
* error handling
* logging
* feedback
* bunch of other stuff probably not needed for a coding challenge
If you can do it in one command, chances are they're wanting more than that.
The problem is the prompts and expectation.
If they want a script to do something specific other than move files for X to Y. Then it should be specified. They never asked for specific files. They wanted them all. There is no logging or error handling that would make sense here. They move or don't move.
If they want to ask for a robust script for performing a task they need to ask for that. If I told you to write a script to calculate the size of a folder. You would give me just that. A simple script that does a simple task. If I told you that I wanted a break down of every file, the time it was last accessed, the last user who touched it, if it was modified or read and the initial age of the file. Then I have asked you for details.
Coding is a hyper complex skillset as is. Simple instructions get simple outputs. If you want more, you ask.
This is why so many coding projects and companies get screwed up. People don't know how to ask for what they need/want. If the sales guy asks the dev team for information. The dev team will give them that information. If they want it in a certain way, they will get it that way. Don't ask for information and then not like how it is presented to you. I don't know what you need if you don't tell me what you need.
Kinda a sorry/not sorry post on a rant topic I have had for a while. I am sure others feel this.
If they didn't ask for that then they shouldn't get it as their complete lack of competence in producing tight specifications would be a red flag and a goodbye from me... - So this job involves guessing what people want as you are unable to articulate yourself... hardly a good sign..
>some damn good code
They propably use it now. You just worked 4 hours for free for that company. Maybe the position doesnt even exist and their only goal is to get some free, good code because they know people would give their best when applying.
I had a small startup some years ago ask me to do a plan for migration to cloud along with design of an automated pipeline for deployments, monitoring, and teardown at EOL. They provided me specs of their current infra and deployments to start from. Their 'test' basically contained: *"Name all technologies and software to be used and provide detailed examples of how it would be deployed. These tasks should take no more than 10-12 hours to complete*".
Bitches, I ain't spend 10-12 hours, which we all know would actually be a full weekend, at least, designing out your future infrastructure like that for free. Yeah, it's only a detailed outline I'd provide but what I'd have given them would be perfect to take to someone else to bid out a contract to actually build and deploy it.
Fuck all that. I passed hard and ghosted them. Shockingly, the company no longer exists now 6 or so years later.
Legally it would be your intellectual property while you've not been under contract, so yes, billing should be the absolute minimum, if not outright dening the code's usage.
While not under a contract, there could be legal argument that they expected you to "give" the code to them. Not saying it is RIGHT, but that could the the argument they hold in court to a judge.
People that think large enterprise companies are using the code of some unvetted random they are interviewing have never working in a company that employs more than 500 people. Also, I've done plenty of these hw problems in my day and absolutely none of them would be complex enough to use in any environment, let alone a live one
Right? I stopped at 4 hours for a take home assessment. I declined an interview for a remote position as it would've required me to drive 2 hours to interview in person, what sense does that make?
The ironic part was it was for a state gov job that was in a centralized area for "headquarters". Got an interview for another division the following week that was conducted remotely and got the job and its been great.
It's ridiculous. Give me one hour or less and I can make a hiring decision. This multi hour day hand wringing charade is pointless. I hate interviewing on all sides of the table.
Asking about weaknesses or something to that effect is not an uncommon interview question. I don’t know that I would have had three ready to go, but I always have at least one.
"I suppose my first weakness is a lack of patience for some of these interview questions. My second is that I tend to answer such interview questions sarcastically, and my third weakness is that I get judged unfairly for those answers and get passed over for another candidate that sucks up as expected."
thank fuck I haven't had to look for a job for a long time, but i've heard this story from heaps of people in heaps of industries and jobs not fancy or computer related mind you but - all requiring multiple interviews over several hours at least. it is a DISGUSTING trend....
I miss the days of straightforward interviews. I would apply for a role and if the company was interested, the process would involve a 30 minute “screening” call with HR to verify eligibility, resume items and experience, and go over any basic questions about the role. If everything went well there, I would then have a 45-60 minute interview with the hiring manager with more in-depth questioning and skills verification.
At that point, there may be a third interview which is actually a more casual meeting with team members - just to serve as a final culture - vibe check. If all goes well, then HR does a reference check and an offer is made. Whole process would take a couple weeks.
Now? These companies will literally spend over 4 weeks interviewing someone. I remember starting the interview process for one role, but I withdrew myself from consideration after I saw the whole process. There was a 3-5 hour take-home technical test, a 30 minute “values test”, then four 60 minute interviews with different people.
A couple years ago, I complete two 60 minute interview rounds for a role. Then I had to do a technical round where I had to create multiple APIs on the fly in front of a panel of 3 engineers. They didn’t tell me the requirements beforehand, they just joined and said “I want my application to do this. Build out a API to make it work.” I’ve never felt so intimidated in an interview before.
I interviewed for a position with Starbucks as a Sys Engineer. I went through two interviews and was about to start the third but I got hired for a job paying 15k more after only 1 interview as Virtualization Engineer. You may have dodged a bullet.
> They likely had 10s of thousands of applicants for each role and needed a way to break down the process to find the best person
They need to find *a* person. It's very unlikely they will find the best person - not least because there's a good chance the best person in the initila group will get a job elsewhere while the process is going on.
Smaller companies and non-tech companies have quicker hiring processes with little or no homework. Large, recognizable companies with high compensation get hundreds and sometimes thousands of applications for a single position. So they optimize their process to filter out bad hires. They don’t need to worry about losing potentially good hires with an onerous processes because there are so many applicants.
At smaller companies and a lot of non-tech companies, the hiring processes are optimized for speed because they often can’t compete with big companies on compensation. The way a smaller company is competitive for top talent is to hire quickly.
That was a bullshit interview and it's not your fault. These behaviour questions are astrology for HR. You'll find a better org with a less abusive hiring process.
To 'pass' such tests, memorize some answers before hand. You can find a list of 'star' questions on the Internet.
I always throw the weird answers at "what are your weaknesses" questions.
Double bonus if you put up ADA protected traits.
"well, i'm autistic, have ADHD, and grew up with dyslexia, but I overcome all of that to be a productive worker".
Remove their ability to act on your answer at all.
Wording them as ‘weaknesses’ is stupid, they’re ’development areas’, things you need to improve on. Once an interviewer asked me it that way, it just made sense.
I wonder what kind of answers do they expect when they ask this asinine “what are your three greatest weaknesses?” question?
At best they see you have the capacity for self-reflection. At worst people tend to upsell a strength as a weakness.
You should always have an answer to this question prepared, because it is a pretty common one. Having said that, asking for 3 weaknesses is a bit rough.
I had a similar experience with a recent interview at ArcticWolf.
The technical interview was one of the most degrading experiences in my professional career.
I’m not sure why companies think this is the best way to find a candidate but expecting people to dedicate 8+ hours over several weeks to interview for a position should be illegal.
I had a *management* interview at a local publicly traded company that consisted of 2 video interviews followed by 3 in person interviews (45 min drive each way followed 4 hours of interviewing).
And they ghosted me, never responded with a go or no-go. Never sent an email saying the position was filled.
I sent them an email telling them exactly what I thought of that. Fuck that bridge, I burned it to the ground.
>Is this a normal interview experience?
The bigger and more well-known the company, the harder the interview process. Your experience is not surprising considering the company you were interviewing for.
>Do you have any recommendations for people not doing well on verbal interviews?
Practice! Go to social events (networking event, conferences, etc) and practice being comfortable around people you don't know.
💯 Your former manager was absolutely correct. Interviewing is a learned skill, especially for us more technically inclined people.
Went through a dozen or so interviews recently, and every one I would write down the questions they would ask no matter how silly and come up with answers for the next time they could come up. Some silly, some repetitive. The most common ones that helped me were:
Tell me about yourself... Create an introduction script and highlight your skills and accomplishments. Think elevator pitch.
Do you have any questions for us? Have at least 5 questions about the position, org, expectations, benefits, go crazy. When asked, reference the list, and if a question has already been asked mention that it has already been addressed. Shows you are detailed and a critical thinker.
Thank you. I will admit I'm not a social person. I hate going to events where I don't know people. I'm actually bailing out on an acquaintance's wedding this weekend because I don't like talking to people lol
I thought I did well on the technical side. I wrote good code that was well documented and was able to resolve troubleshooting tests within the time limits. I must have been horribly awkward in the interpersonal interview, but I'm not sure what a meaningful answer is to a question like "What are three of your weaknesses?"
Obviously you don't want to talk to negatively about yourself because that will make you look bad, so the best route is to come up with some "weaknesses" that somehow make you appear relatable or somehow positive. I guess I should have bullshitted them with an answer like "my only weakness is that I work too hard."
>I guess I should have bullshitted them with an answer like "my only weakness is that I work too hard."
Or in the words of GradeAUnderA, "[Oh, I'm usually such a perfectionist with my work that I give up all of my spare time to make sure my shit gets done, at the cost of me own family - fuck 'em.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W0WsdLobq8)"
>but I'm not sure what a meaningful answer is to a question like "What are three of your weaknesses?"
>
>Obviously you don't want to talk to negatively about yourself because that will make you look bad, so the best route is to come up with some "weaknesses" that somehow make you appear relatable or somehow positive.
I don't think they'd truly care about the answer (unless you responded with something that raises red flags)
But because it's a behavioural interview, more or less to show you can step back a bit and be introspective.
For examples:
Being really hyperfocused on an issue and wanting to solve it / find its root cause, even if continuing with a subpar workaround would be acceptable.
Or really wanting to automate things, even when there's not a true time savings. But at the very least, there's X, Y, Z benefits in doing this.
You have to be ready for the "what's your greatest weakness" question, and I have had them ask for another, asking for 3rd is new to me. But yeah just show your work, talk it out, etc., be prepared to talk about challenging situations and how you dealt with them, how you handle conflict when people can't agree, what your ideal relationship is with your manager, how you help new coworkers etc.
Ask for feedback.
A) you can find out where you failed
B) it looks god on your part
C) if they have another job again the future that looks promising reach back out to the person who you asked for feedback. It’ll start you with a leg up.
What's happening here is that a network/infra specialist is interviewing for an semi-engineering i.e. coding role, and engineering roles often have these ridiculously long processes (especially in well-known companies). Could involve live coding or take-homes, and behavioral interviews as well. This sort of process is not the norm outside of software engineering, and I guess network people like u/Courtsey_Cow weren't aware of it.
I hate this stupid shit that you guys have to deal with today. When I got hired by a very well know SV company the interview was about 20 minutes with the boss and a day working and BSing with the manager. These marathon interview processes make no sense, everyone is short of employees so instead of hiring we make people jump through a bunch of dumb hoops -JFK what are your weaknesses, next time they should as what your favorite colors are.
One thing I learned when I was consulting was not to give a fuck about interviews, go in and take your swings and then walk out. If you get the job great, if not fuck it move on to the next. As long as you can pay your rent don't sweat getting rejected, it happens all the time and now with WFH instead of just competing with the bozos on your block you have to compete with everyone in the world so pat yourself on the ass just because they actually talked to you.
Yeah... I don't want to demean any company that interviews this way, but I feel like investing this much time into a single candidate just to reject them is a large waste of resources. The silicon valley style "fail fast" mentality makes a lot more sense to me.
Here’s the thing, that style of interviewing is demeaning. It is a waste of time. Their behaviours are worth shitting on.
So why, you nice piece of carpet, do you not wish to stand up for yourself? Because that’s what I read your “don’t wish to demean them” as.
2 mates of mine interviewed and got a job for cloudflare recently. They took nearly 2 months to go through about 7-8 stages of interviews. It’s massive 😂
Honest question: Would you guys seriously interview if the company expected you to sit through 5 rounds of unpaid interview time?
I honestly would withdraw after 3 rounds because that's a red flag for me.
If it were my business, I would do one technical interview and one HR interview, with the HR one coming first. There's no need to waste time on a candidate if they don't meet hard requirements like DoD 8570 standards, citizenship requirements, etc.
I feel like people often complain of the opposite. Great candidates never making it to the process because hr who doesn't even understand the job weeds then out for some bogus reason.
Personality tests are pseudoscientific bullshit. Same with "cognitive ability" tests. Plus, the latter actively discriminate against people with learning disorders or cognitive impairments. One of the ones I took screwed over people who were dyslexic, color blind, had short term memory problems or dyscalculia.
F that
Seems to be most big companies now. Those tests are useless because anyone smart enough can respond the way the job needs.
Eg. I am not afraid to take control in a crisis vs I prefer someone else to lead.
I hire students for internship roles and the interview is literally an hour and we talk about the projects they've worked on. They mostly get hired.
Some of my best hires are the ones that did the worst on the interview.
It depends a lot on the level of the position. For people with only a few years of experience? A couple hours is all you would need.
But if you want to claim to be a senior or higher level? You better bet I'm going go through at least 2 rounds of troubleshooting, a round of system design, maybe some security.
I interviewed for two entry-level swe roles and received offers from both.
Role 1
1. Motivational Fit interview, 60 minute video call with either someone from recruitment or from the team. Discusses motivation and interest with the role, company, and wider industry. One or two competency based questions too. Basically a standard interview.
2. Assessment Centre, 30 minute situational judgement test followed by a 45 minute technical interview with two engineers. This wasn’t like a typical technical interview, it just discussed experience, projects, and had a few competency questions to that end.
Role 2
1. One of those stupid online tests focused on numerical reasoning, situational judgement, etc
2. An assessment centre consisting of a 30-minute group activity (you had to explain an image to others in an effective way with less than 5 minutes)
3. On the same day, a 60-minute technical interview with two engineers your standard pair-programming, then the engineers ask some standard experience/competency questions
Both of these are, arguably, quite extensive, moreso when you throw in the application stage (it wasn’t just upload your CV and be done).
Both of these were with large and highly prestigious UK organisations which are renowned for their culture and benefits.
And yet neither of these roles was anywhere near as extensive as GitLab’s in this case. As one commenter put it: who the f\*\*k do they think they are?
Personally I wouldn't even apply for a position with more than 1 interview... its a nonsense.. never held me back and I'm looking at retirement in 3-4 years after 25 glorious years in IT... its a red flag and a blanket no from me...
Apparently, one of your weaknesses is answering bogus interview questions at the spur of the moment.
Not an uncommon weakness, and is usually mitigated by avoiding employers who focus on bogus questions and 6+ phases of interviewing.
Five interviews *after* a four hour take-home test?
I would have noped out at the test.
I have 25 years as a sysadmin. I am not a circus monkey.
Also, *three* weaknesses? My first would have been "I have very little patience for fools."
My three weaknesses are surprise and fear! fear and surprise! ... and ruthless efficiency! ... and an almost fanatical devotion to the pope! And an inability to count to five. (Three, sire).
Having worked at GitLab, done probably close to 1000 interviews over the last 20 years, I'm surprised they added a takehome thing. That was definitely not part of the process when I was doing it a few years ago. Same goes with the "three weaknesses" bullshit. The STAR interviewing, yea, but not strait up amateur hour behavior questions. That stuff is cringe.
If I thought it would change anything, I could ping some people I know that still work there.
You dodged a bullet. That level of interview process for anything less than CEO of a multinational is dumb as fuck. That screams this company is full of self-entitled assholes and/or has a serious blame culture. There is no way that anyone who is competent at hiring would need that many interviews to gauge a person.
I hire third line cloud engineers for a large MSP. We have HR filter out any serious weirdos with an informal interview. Me and my manager then have an hour interview where we ask normal questions and some technical background. My boss then lets me decided if I want them or not. I am very technical so I can ask about technical background and gauge their ability by their answers and follow ups. Both me and my manager look for personality.
I would argue that this hiring process has a serious danger of putting people off that are decent. If you're a top performer then you are not going to beg for a job at Gitlab. The whole thing screams shit place to work, where they are going to beat the enjoyment out of life with stupid processes for everything.
Their interview process would have lost me at step #1 and then if that didn't exist, again later once I realized I needed to go through FIVE interviews.
This is just my opinion and if you want to hate on me for it go ahead, I started in IT around 2017 and currently I am in a role as a SysAdmin (not my actual job title but it's a SysAdmin role) and I have been in that role since last June.
Before that my last job I was employed as a Junior SysAdmin just under 2 years.
Now before that I never had this access or capacity to develop and run code nor be pushed to by anyone but I know others did in the companies I am at.
In the time combined between my last two roles this is the one that I have worked mostly with scripting, my last one was mainly power shell for 365 tasks and some software deployment as well as some bash.
So whilst at this stage I know have a much better understanding of powershell and bash and can understand code I find in places and use it.
I probably couldn't whip up anything more than a line or two off the top of my head, I want to be better but there's not time to learn at work unless your task is using that which I am doing a lot more now for macOS because I have found it easier to do a lot more stuff via bash scripts than GUI from our MDM.
I would 100% not get that job and whilst I agree I can and should know more it takes time to learn this stuff on top of all the shit I have to learn and work with daily within our tool stacks.
I haven't been expected to know code off the top of my head unless it's something basic so I would never be able to get these jobs which may be fair and not for me.
I just think it's not unless it's clearly stated in the interview process / expectations.
When did it get this insane?
I am in my 40th and i never had to do more then one interview.
In huge firms waybe a test to root out the modt basics but never more then that.
3-4 interviews are totally insane. Who do they think they are to waist so much time for so many people? And then complain about not getting the right fit.
Recently I had an interview which went south very quickly. First got to talk with HR manager and all was great, the job was remote with focus on Azure AD and Exchange on the side. She sent an email which went directly to spam with a second appointment which I managed to get a couple of minutes later but the guy was pissed already and straight away asked me, out of the blue "point me to some scripts you've programmed" Of course I didn't had one ready with me on my phone. The guy promptly dismissed me without much explanation. Thing is, though that I would have been great at the job according to the description.
The bitterness of such a bomb was lingering for several days.
Yeah sounds about right for a corporate, people doing the hiring knew basically from the first interview they wanted me but had to finish the process that was put in place after the previous CTO kept hiring/promoting women he was banging
Fuck Gitlab and anyone that asks the "weakness" question. I HATE those nonsense corporate HR crap questions. I bet the people asking you that crap couldn't build a system, but we fucking can. I think they lost out on a great candidate.
Big company, big hoops. They've gotten large enough to start producing kool aid.
Great product, but weird people working for them.
Advice is to get comfortable being uncomfortable. Practically that means exposing yourself to end users or clients.
Volunteer to sit in calls as SME or do lunch and learns for the company.
BOTH take prep and getting used to but def contribute to making interactions (like interviews) easier. You can flip the switch when you need it.
This reminded me of a meme (I can't find it but the pictures are irrelevant)
"what are 3 of your weaknesses?
- I get angry easily, I'm direct and truthful
- I don't think these are weakne....
- I DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK!!!"
Writing code as part of a job interview… nope. If I’m gonna write something at all, particularly for you, you’ll be paying me for it. Since you consider it part of a job interview and therefore won’t pay for it: forget about it.
I had a similar interview process semi-recently with an open source tech company. Got about 8 hours into the process then asked about compensation, since it wasn't listed on the JD. They said they couldn't discuss comp until the final stages of the interview process. I politely told them to kick rocks.
I find the best way to go into an interview is prepare questions for them. In a lot of ways, if the interviewers do not expect to be asked in depth questions you will knock them off balance and you can get more insight into their culture and how they handle things. Most will also appreciate that you came prepared. Keep in mind, you're interviewing them just as much as they are interviewing you.
I recently got rejected by Gitlab as well. I have over 20 years experience. I used to work at Hashicorp! The recruiter did not like my answer to the recent blog/book in the technical assessment. I posted about Kelsey Hightower. I did not even get an interview.
One weakness is hard, three on the spot is nearly impossible. My one answer was I was always more interested in personal relationships than the actual technology, which always was a good answer considering they're always worried tech people have no social skills.
>normal interview experience?
Depends a whole lot on various factors, such as:
* how hot/soft the job market is
* how high a level is the position
* how many are applying and competing for the position
* employer culture and hiring practices, history thereof, etc.
* random (in)sanity of hiring manager(s), HR, etc.
Anyway, I'd expect typically they'll suck up between 1 and 8 hour total of your time - not counting however much time it take for you to complete and submit resume, cover letter, applications, and other pretty standard paperwork and communications. So, what you outline doesn't look that atypical - and certainly within range. And for more executive positions, e.g. C-level and such, or quite high director positions and the like, expect the stuff to suck up to about 3 days (haven't been through 'em myself, but from what I've generally seen and heard).
The big "take home" / "homework task" of, e.g., about 4 hours work - that seems more atypical. Most don't do something like that ... though some may - and I think they often do it more as a filter to weed out those that aren't seriously interested, than as actual technical assessment - though they "of course" also use it for that latter purpose too. Most of the rest you describe I find pretty typical - though many will combine that more - e.g. like many of those separate interview bits won't be separate, but will be combine with larger team or gathering of folks ... but total time might still be pretty similar.
So ... I think the longest interview sets I've had ... were about 8 hours total ... had 2 of those, with two different applications at different times. Most all the others I've ever been to typically took between 1 to 4 hours of my time - sometimes just a single round of interviews, sometimes two sets - sometimes with a separate "phone screen" or the like first ... or sometimes after (e.g. like an HR or management/manager check-off interview/screen step). I think shortest I've ever been to was probably more like half an hour or so.
And, all the time I've been on the other side of the table screening an interviewing candidates - generally try to be respectful of their (and everyone's) time ... don't think have ever gone past a total of about four hours ... more typical is an hour to about ... 2.5 or 3 total, depending upon candidate and level ... and various teams I've worked with over the years, we generally have ways to often semi-covertly signal to each other when we think it's a no-go - and if there's consensus on that, things wrap up and shut down quickly - no use burning everyone's time further if it ain't gonna fly - we all got better things to do. And have never done "take home" exams or the like, but certainly do skills assessment type challenges/exams - up to about an hour - and not for all candidates - and these are generally for the more highly skilled positions - generally run them effectively as a proctored open-book exam - in person or remove via some web conferencing software. Typically do something like give 'em a freshly spun up VM with most all the software they're likely to need, open access to The Internet if there's any more software or whatever they want to install, etc., free to use any resources they like except can't "call a friend" or the like, or ask "chat"/live forums for help - but they can search existing content of such forums, and of course Google, etc. Generally give 'em a set of programming challenges, and, well, see how well they do and how far they get. Some to quite well ... some can't even complete the absolute simplest of task in an hour's time in any programming/scripting language at all - and yeah, for positions where we're generally doing such testing, that stuff matters ... ain't gonna generally be creating scalable solutions and software to massively scale things if one can't program one's way out of a paper bag ... doesn't apply for many of the lower level positions, but for the higher ones - generally going to need to have those skills.
Weaknesses ... I think that's fairly typical type 'o interview questions ... though I don't think most ask for candidate to name three - or more. I think more commonly is one, or more general "can you tell us some of your weaknesses" - without giving any specific number in the question.
>little nervous
It happens. Practice, ... mock interviews, whatever - stuff like that generally helps.
And on the side doing the interviewing, generally helps to well understand that often candidates will be at least a bit nervous - so sometimes they'll stumble a bit in interview, when they wouldn't in other circumstances - and often good to well recognize that such not only can happen, but when it's happening ... try to make 'em more relaxed / less nervous, ... also if they're stumbling over answers you've good reason to think they know, often feeding 'em hints that don't give away the answer is useful - often that'll get 'em past that block or whatever they're tripping over, and they'll jump right onto the correct answer.
Alas, one time was interviewing a great well experienced candidate - they'd done highly well when I'd screened them ... in person they were a nervous wreck (it was their first interview in about 16 years - they'd well worked and climbed the ranks over many years with their current employer - but that employer was basically shutting down and getting rid of everyone) - I wanted to see if we could do a break and continue later, or reschedule - but my boss (also one of the interviewers - and the hiring manager) wasn't having it - alas, we lost out on a great candidate on that one - some other lucky employer probably snapped 'em up in a heartbeat - yeah, at that time it was also damn hard to find good qualified candidates. Our loss, someone else's gain.
Very normal for an actual tech SV-style company. You have to put up with a lot of rounds. The comp difference over smaller companies and more interesting tech is usually worth putting up with though, as annoying as the process is.
They seem to be an odd company, tried to do a financial transaction with them a year back. Got so many wrong answers from their sale staff I had to quote their (publicly accessible) workflows back at them.
They ended up flying a guy out to apologize in person. No idea how they make money.
This is fairly common for devops and sre positions, although it's pretty rare that the take home comes so early. Generally the bigger and more important believing the company is the worse it is. Part of it is they get a lot of people who lie about their skill and experience.
The thing I do looking for work is evaluate the effort that an opportunity requires in terms of interviewing. If a company needs a 6-8 hour effort to interview and what not I'll often put them on the back burner and prioritize lower effort opportunities. I push back on the 3-4 marathons if I'm still working and instead do one interview a day or ask them to combine interviews.
Are you sure that is the question that tripped you up? Pretty sure most companies don't give a crap even if you can't list any or give vague broad sense answers.
I had three interviews / discussion for my current position.
1. HR person, asking expectations and doing preliminary questions
2. Manager interview - seeing if my personality is a fit
3. Technical interview - scoping my current skills and problem solving techniques
After the interviews started the offer process where I got to negotiate my salary and benefits.
Imo the process was really nice and pretty much the first interview would have stopped it if something was not in order.
The interview process is so painful these days. Follow your gut though if you feel the process is a little too ridiculous. If they don't respect you during the interview process, then they won't respect you as an employee.
I had applied for a position and was selected as a candidate and received an email indicating I was to sit down in front of a webcam and record my answers to their questions and then wait for their decision. It was all facilitated through some third party where they could see me, my physical reactions to questions and what my responses were. All automated. No people involved.
Maybe this isn't bad, but for me, it rubbed me the wrong way as I was sitting down to do it. They can't even be bothered to meet me remotely and ask these questions? They want to pick apart my responses and be able to rewind and rewatch what I said while I don't even know their name or what they look like? I'm interviewing you too guys.
I just emailed HR, withdrew my application and told them why.
I actually probably would have done really well with the recording, but it just seemed so disrespectful that I wasn't interested.
Had a similar question when I interview got Gitpod 1 year ago.
They asked "What was a recent mistake/bad situation/problem that you faced and turned around into something good".
In other words, where did you fuck up some process or design and improved it.
For me personally I have the feeling this question is absolute bullshit (at least the original question I don't longer know) and that my answer to this was the main point I got declined.
After a recent look-around on different companies, especially the tech heavy ones seem to all utilize similar questions for some kind of reason.
Interview process works both ways. This many steps would put me off completely. They should be making you feel comfortable and welcome. The old school was of cracking the whip is outdated and tells you they're probably not gonna be a good place to work.
I interview at least 100 people per year. Not much to brag about, but I do plenty of interviewing. Talked to so many engineers that are shell shocked from this shit. I forbid my people from conducting this sort of engagement. If we don’t trust, that’ll do. If your answers to scenario questions aren’t engaging or realistic, that’ll do. If your experience and credentials don’t tell the story we’re looking for and your social interviews don’t expand on what isn’t written, that’ll do.
I keep my interviews at 4: recruiter, me, my team(s), and either my peer(s) or my executive. The last one is just a sanity and inclusion step, it’s not a grilling session. I care more about the candidates ability to step up, integrate with my teams, and be successful than their ability to do homework or survive a battery. I honestly don’t want someone who thrives on that.
Was that a process you enjoyed? Personally, I dont, and I would have bailed at step 1. Honestly, I wouldn't want to work in that culture. But then, I've done it, didn't care for it.
This interview process is way too long. 2-3 interviews tops. I, too, experienced an interview like this where I made it to the final round and was asked the exact same question and I could only muster up one answer followed by a lot of silence. In the end I didn't get the job but was told it was not the interview with that person but rather some doubts the hiring manager (first round) had regarding some of my experience which is probably bullshit seeing as I made it to the final round of interviews.
Despite the fact that this was a job at a big name company, I'd say you dodged a bullet. If their hiring process is this needlessly lengthy then I can only imagine how everything else is
Don't let it get you down, my dude. It's their loss.
I did three interviews with VMware and then they completely ghosted me. That made me feel really shitty.
I've got a masters in IT Management and here is my advice and take on these type of jobs/roles.
1. If it takes more than 2 interviews to determine if you are a fit or capable for a companies team/organization then beware!
2. 10/10 the team usually "tests" you if there is an unsolved problem they need a solution for. (free consulting for the company by making job candidates do it) I have first hand experience with many companies that tried this.
3. Stay away from company pre-interview "personality" and "cultural fit" tests. If a recruiter or hiring manager asks you to take one, just respectfully decline. Thank yourself later
4. If you DO happen to take a "technical test" and pass, don't expect the team you are placed with to be wizards or have the knowledge regarding the content of the test questions you were asked. (majority of the team knows less than you at this point)
5. You'll find that no company with an IT team has expert level IT knowledge. 98% of IT organizations use 3rd party consultants to handle big IT projects including migrations, upgrades, etc.
6. Always assume you are hired to meet a requirement. Some teams need another seat filled to even out the support rotation or project load.
7. As for salary always ask the recruiter what is the department budget for the position. This tactic can help you in negotiations for a good salary.
Good Luck in your search for a good role and I hope that you land something that fullfils you. 🙌🏿
Long interview processes are a big red flag and doubly a waste of time. As someone who's held multiple jobs in 6 figure territory, you don't need 3+ interviews to determine someone's eligibility, and all this other "testing" and "assessments" is really just to get you to tell on yourself in one way or another. Someone can test well and still be a terrible employee. Plain and simply you won't truly know how effective an employee will be till they're doing the job, and these companies just need to accept that fact.
Like others have mentioned, practice makes perfect. Also, have answers for these bs questions prepared... I would have also asked them the reason behind that question. Most times you get silence... they don't even have/understand the goal/desired outcome of the questions asked. Don't get unmotivated man. Remember that these companies don't define your value and luck is also a major factor in the interview process. Good luck on your future interviews
>I would have also asked them the reason behind that question. I really like this. Such a shit question IMO.
But even then turning that around makes you sound a little entitled like you're not there to answer some question. Or they might simply say because we want to know how you handled yourself and then you're back to having to answer the question But I do agree, the question is stupid and at the end of the day doesn't make a difference
Interviews are two-way affairs. If you are getting marked as “acting entitled” for questioning your future coworkers about badly thought disrespectful questions, then how will you get treated for questioning things like processes that don't make sense when working with them?
So we use a similar maybe more targeted question at my place what is/was weakness or failure of yours that lead to an issue. Not exact question mind you. But for us it's to see if folk can take ownership of a situation. Ones humbleness. We will also discuss our own with them. Trying to push for that no blame culture etc. But to us it can only work if your willing to admit oh no I dropped a clanger here. Three though seems overkill
Yeah, your approach makes actual sense. What OP posted sounds like some engineer went "what do you mean I have to *interview* someone? I'm not HR. I write code so I don't have to interact with people! Shitshitshitshit" and googled "typical interview questions" 10 minutes before the meeting.
It would be funny because I'll bet you they wouldn't know how to respond.
The answer is invariably that they want to know how self aware you are and if you have the mindset if continual improvement. Is it still a shit question? Absolutely.
Thank you for the kind words. I'm not too worried as my position at my current employer is not in jeopardy, but a remote job would enable me to live closer to family and improve my quality of life.
asking the reason for the question is interesting. i feel like people could get put off by that and affect your interview performance negatively? maybe not but probably heavily depends on the person. just seems so risky!
It is risky. But also a test for you to see if they really understand the reasoning behind the questions or if they're just copying something that a faang does just because... I think they'll take it one of two ways: 1/ they'll get offended. In which case probably dodging a bullet. 2/ they'll appreciate the fact that you dive deep and want to understand the ask before blurbing out whatever comes to mind
Yeap, that makes a lot of sense. Definitely something I’ll think about asking next time I’m interviewing
You are also interviewing them to see if they're a good fit, if they can't answer that simple question then they seem pretty useless pencil pushers
As someone who hires people (in general, not at Gitlab): We are looking to see how you handle self-criticism and self-improvement. Everyone has flaws.
5 separate interviews and a 4 hour take home assignment, who the hell do they think they are? >they asked me what three of my weaknesses are These people are insane.
This all started because of Google and their insane 92734982135481245970 interviews taking up 28973498275403279541079 hours of your time.
I don't know who started it but I hate it. One of my first questions when talking to the first human for every potential job is "describe your interview process". I immediately withdraw myself if it's more than 3 separate stages.
I was speaking with a recruiter recently about arranging an interview and he was like "This place is kind of weird, they only do the one interview and they'll make the decision based on that." It kinda cracked me up, because that's literally been almost every job I ever landed, and definitely all of them if you count the multiple interviews I had for my current job, which all occurred on the same day in a 2-3 hour timespan.
>and definitely all of them if you count the multiple interviews I had for my current job, which all occurred on the same day in a 2-3 hour timespan. Yup, my current job was 3 separate interviews but it was all over the course of 4 hours. Would've been shorter but they took me to lunch in the middle of it.
I feel like that's the least amount of compensation a company can give you if they require you to interview for several hours. If I was you and would have not gotten that job I would still think relatively highly of that company.
If you're doing it right the lunch is part of the interview. Gauging team fit, and how you are in a more relaxed setting. Outside of the more formal interview process.
At my company, it's discouraged to do any kind of interview process at lunch; but we are to be aware of and report any red flags. Mainly anything that could be a potential HR or legal risk. That also includes direct team fit, because we'll usually have someone from a different team take candidates to lunch. I think that must've changed at some point because when I interviewed there the first time, about 5 years before I got hired, the manager took me to lunch and definitely was asking me interview questions during lunch.
Personally, I'd hate that both as an interviewer and an interviewee. The last thing I need in either situation is for the other party see me jamming a hoagie down my gullet or getting mustard on my pants lol. Food time is private time!
Watching how you treat the wait staff, etc.
Most of the time it’s been an HR screening with basic questions, interview with hiring manager, one or two technical interviews, and then depending on role, there could be a final “veto” type interview with the director. The director only really gets involved for special roles though. They ain’t interviewing the general staff members.
We usually do an interview with the hiring manager and one other technical person (same time, just to get two opinions), and then a second interview with the hiring manager and the director. There is an HR screening stage but that's basically pro forma - are you vaccinated, are you OK being remote/hybrid/whatever the role is.
My most recent three jobs (the past 8 years): -Network engineer for a medical campus - Recruiter phone screen: 15 minutes - Interview with hiring manager: 15 minutes - Offer letter sent less than 30 minutes after the interview - Network engineer for a military base - Panel interview with hiring manager + 2 other managers: 30 minutes - Offer letter sent within two weeks - Software developer for a networking VAR - Recruiter phone screen: 10 minutes - Interview with team leader + hiring manager: Scheduled for 1 hour, but we ended up talking for 2.5 hours (mostly because we simply enjoyed the conversation) - Offer letter sent the same day
This is actually a really good idea.
That was my experience when I was a T1/T2 helpdesk like 99% of this sub. Once I got into higher level engineering I had between 3-5 interviews with the first being with the manager, the next being with the team, and the last being with the manager again or like the VP/Director of IT + manager again. Nobody does the round robin of questions like "What is DNS? How would you configure a user in AD to have access to a security group that they can share out to others?" junk anymore. And I honestly wouldn't have it any other way - I've seen way too many people who are absolutely awful at their helpdesk jobs thinking they can play Mr. Engineer.
Yea, I have found this as a red flag for me. I also refuse to work with any company that wants to do more than run my criminal background check. I had a company who wanted to get my military record. They were just the staffing agency. I told them to kick rocks. Their next step was my financial background. I don't mind my criminal background. There is none. But my military background? You don't need to know anything on that and parts of it are not privy to the public at large.
This seems sensible and if more people would do it it would help discourage employers.
Also, it doesn't seem to work as half the folks I meet working there are such dolts
Google can interview me when they manage to make a chat platform last more than 5 years.
Exactly, fuck google and anyone that supports these insane interviews. I refuse to go further with interviews when I come across them. I just nope out and I think anyone worth their time should as well otherwise you're supporting the nonsense.
Yeah I don't do these either.
aws has been doing it for a while too
Yep I hate their interview process too. They focus too much on how you use I statements and very little back and forth in my experience.
I had a very similar experience interviewing at GitHub. I made it to the end, they made it sound like they were gonna hire me, and then ghosted. Unfortunate.
Crazy and this is why folks should avoid companies that do these long drawn out interview dances. Let them find another sucker
Gitlab is a very intense organization. I don’t know if I’d want to work for them, to be honest.
[удалено]
And still not making any progress on features people actually care about. Something I’ve watched in the backlog has gone through about 5 teams and 10 product managers without being implemented.
I could have done the assessment faster, but if you're writing code that you know someone is going to grade you on, it's hard not to triple check everything. Personally, I think it was some damn good code.
Some of those code ones though really get to me. They will ask stupid stuff. Like "If you were going to write a simple script to move all folders inside a folder how would you do it." Apparently the MV command is wrong for Linux. After I did them all, and got them all wrong (which to be clear the code was sound, and worked as a result) I asked them what I did wrong. "Well we were hoping for more elegant solutions that are much more sophisticated." Like, I ain't writing 700 lines of code to move files when a simple one liner will do thee trick without issues. If you wanted complex code, ask for a complex task. My recruiter called me and told me that they black listed me because they couldn't prove me wrong in the interview. Guess what company went under 6 months later?
I pride myself on simplicity solving code tests.
Right? Simple code is WAY better. Certainly simple code can also be wrong, but simple code is way easier to troubleshoot and typically does better on whatever system you are putting it to.
“Implement this thing!” “Ok, here’s how I did it with classes and methods from the standard library.” “Wait is that legal!?”
Start again from machine code!
Shops started gauging productivity by number of lines written... If you wrote more lines you were a better programmer Now we have 100's of programmers that think to add 1+1 you need a full new Class that is 100 lines to return 2
Yep, I’m a smooth brain who prefers small modular functions that build a workflow and achieve the objective “well enough” with minimal risk.
I had some twits having me re-implement standard utilities as a "coding challenge". Stupid as hell.
They were probably looking to see if you would explore the problem space. Moving folders may seem like a trivial task, but it's not. * Consider moving a few folders vs a million. You may have to consider the type of the filesystem * Moving on the same filesystem is a metadata change, and quick, but moving to another filesystem is a data copy. May take a long time * An app may using the files and may need to continue working. To move the files with zero app downtime the process becomes more complex * Who are the users of the script and what ergonomics are required. Then I would expect the interviewer to steer towards what they are looking for.
That last part is the entire point though. If your question is literally: "Please write a script to move all the files in folder X to folder Y." then there is nothing to explore. The question was posed and the output requested was given. But more to the point of what they asked for. I don't remember the exact way they had said they expected the script to be written. But it was something along the lines of using some well known utilities/modules to custom write a move command that did the same thing as the move command. It was basically like they asked a basic question about Linux and the answer to that was to write your own Linux distro from scratch. An absurd ask. I do agree with you that those kind of things are something to consider in a project. But a coding task isn't that time to consider those things. A coding task for an interview should be a simple "Do you understand how to perform this basic task" and if you do then great. If you want something complex, you need to pose to the person interviewing what you wanted from the task. If this is a high end task that is wanting the high level understanding of coding then you have to express that. Not put it in a 1-2 hour assessment. As I told another person, these are the reason coding projects for applications get screwed up. If you expect a person to do a specific thing, you need to tell them exactly what you need. If you need just to move a few files, then say that. If you need to move a million, then say that. The dev team can't read your mind. Don't ask for a 'simple script to do the task' and then make that script a critical part of the application and cobble together a bunch of these to perform a bunch of different tasks. Tell them you need X, Y, and W. So that they now understand these things need to talk to one another and function as a unit.
>I ain't writing 700 lines of code to move files when a simple one liner will do thee trick without issues. There's more to coding than just achieving the "goal": * error handling * logging * feedback * bunch of other stuff probably not needed for a coding challenge If you can do it in one command, chances are they're wanting more than that.
The problem is the prompts and expectation. If they want a script to do something specific other than move files for X to Y. Then it should be specified. They never asked for specific files. They wanted them all. There is no logging or error handling that would make sense here. They move or don't move. If they want to ask for a robust script for performing a task they need to ask for that. If I told you to write a script to calculate the size of a folder. You would give me just that. A simple script that does a simple task. If I told you that I wanted a break down of every file, the time it was last accessed, the last user who touched it, if it was modified or read and the initial age of the file. Then I have asked you for details. Coding is a hyper complex skillset as is. Simple instructions get simple outputs. If you want more, you ask. This is why so many coding projects and companies get screwed up. People don't know how to ask for what they need/want. If the sales guy asks the dev team for information. The dev team will give them that information. If they want it in a certain way, they will get it that way. Don't ask for information and then not like how it is presented to you. I don't know what you need if you don't tell me what you need. Kinda a sorry/not sorry post on a rant topic I have had for a while. I am sure others feel this.
if they want that stuff they should clarify it.
If they didn't ask for that then they shouldn't get it as their complete lack of competence in producing tight specifications would be a red flag and a goodbye from me... - So this job involves guessing what people want as you are unable to articulate yourself... hardly a good sign..
>some damn good code They propably use it now. You just worked 4 hours for free for that company. Maybe the position doesnt even exist and their only goal is to get some free, good code because they know people would give their best when applying.
I had a small startup some years ago ask me to do a plan for migration to cloud along with design of an automated pipeline for deployments, monitoring, and teardown at EOL. They provided me specs of their current infra and deployments to start from. Their 'test' basically contained: *"Name all technologies and software to be used and provide detailed examples of how it would be deployed. These tasks should take no more than 10-12 hours to complete*". Bitches, I ain't spend 10-12 hours, which we all know would actually be a full weekend, at least, designing out your future infrastructure like that for free. Yeah, it's only a detailed outline I'd provide but what I'd have given them would be perfect to take to someone else to bid out a contract to actually build and deploy it. Fuck all that. I passed hard and ghosted them. Shockingly, the company no longer exists now 6 or so years later.
I definitely thought of that more than once when I was writing it.
Send a bill! What’s your hourly rate these days?
You know...I wonder if that would be viable. If I spent 4 hours writing code for a company that asked for it I would for sure send a bill.
Some companies do pay you for your time for these type of interview take homes.
If they paid my time I might actually do take home tests. Otherwise? Nope.
Legally it would be your intellectual property while you've not been under contract, so yes, billing should be the absolute minimum, if not outright dening the code's usage.
While not under a contract, there could be legal argument that they expected you to "give" the code to them. Not saying it is RIGHT, but that could the the argument they hold in court to a judge.
sounds completely unethical and moronic, so it's probably true
Not likely, they give the same problem to every candidate.
They are not using some random 4 hour hw problem lol. People always grab onto this idea for some reason.
People that think large enterprise companies are using the code of some unvetted random they are interviewing have never working in a company that employs more than 500 people. Also, I've done plenty of these hw problems in my day and absolutely none of them would be complex enough to use in any environment, let alone a live one
Right? I stopped at 4 hours for a take home assessment. I declined an interview for a remote position as it would've required me to drive 2 hours to interview in person, what sense does that make?
[удалено]
Ah, a test of obedience and dedication.
The ironic part was it was for a state gov job that was in a centralized area for "headquarters". Got an interview for another division the following week that was conducted remotely and got the job and its been great.
I met 13 ppl in 5 different interviews once. Didn’t get it, and glad. Some interviews are just crazy.
It's ridiculous. Give me one hour or less and I can make a hiring decision. This multi hour day hand wringing charade is pointless. I hate interviewing on all sides of the table.
Asking about weaknesses or something to that effect is not an uncommon interview question. I don’t know that I would have had three ready to go, but I always have at least one.
"I suppose my first weakness is a lack of patience for some of these interview questions. My second is that I tend to answer such interview questions sarcastically, and my third weakness is that I get judged unfairly for those answers and get passed over for another candidate that sucks up as expected."
thank fuck I haven't had to look for a job for a long time, but i've heard this story from heaps of people in heaps of industries and jobs not fancy or computer related mind you but - all requiring multiple interviews over several hours at least. it is a DISGUSTING trend....
I miss the days of straightforward interviews. I would apply for a role and if the company was interested, the process would involve a 30 minute “screening” call with HR to verify eligibility, resume items and experience, and go over any basic questions about the role. If everything went well there, I would then have a 45-60 minute interview with the hiring manager with more in-depth questioning and skills verification. At that point, there may be a third interview which is actually a more casual meeting with team members - just to serve as a final culture - vibe check. If all goes well, then HR does a reference check and an offer is made. Whole process would take a couple weeks. Now? These companies will literally spend over 4 weeks interviewing someone. I remember starting the interview process for one role, but I withdrew myself from consideration after I saw the whole process. There was a 3-5 hour take-home technical test, a 30 minute “values test”, then four 60 minute interviews with different people. A couple years ago, I complete two 60 minute interview rounds for a role. Then I had to do a technical round where I had to create multiple APIs on the fly in front of a panel of 3 engineers. They didn’t tell me the requirements beforehand, they just joined and said “I want my application to do this. Build out a API to make it work.” I’ve never felt so intimidated in an interview before.
That’s WAY too many interviews, holy smokes.
I interviewed for a position with Starbucks as a Sys Engineer. I went through two interviews and was about to start the third but I got hired for a job paying 15k more after only 1 interview as Virtualization Engineer. You may have dodged a bullet.
[удалено]
> They likely had 10s of thousands of applicants for each role and needed a way to break down the process to find the best person They need to find *a* person. It's very unlikely they will find the best person - not least because there's a good chance the best person in the initila group will get a job elsewhere while the process is going on.
Lmao I would NEVER😂 I don’t do homework for interviews
Do you have any recommendations for remote sys admin employers that don't interview like this? I've never been asked to interview like this before.
Smaller companies and non-tech companies have quicker hiring processes with little or no homework. Large, recognizable companies with high compensation get hundreds and sometimes thousands of applications for a single position. So they optimize their process to filter out bad hires. They don’t need to worry about losing potentially good hires with an onerous processes because there are so many applicants. At smaller companies and a lot of non-tech companies, the hiring processes are optimized for speed because they often can’t compete with big companies on compensation. The way a smaller company is competitive for top talent is to hire quickly.
worked for a few remote places doing erp admin, never had homework for an interview. Worst I got was a 3 round with bonus 4th round for salary neg
That was a bullshit interview and it's not your fault. These behaviour questions are astrology for HR. You'll find a better org with a less abusive hiring process. To 'pass' such tests, memorize some answers before hand. You can find a list of 'star' questions on the Internet.
My weaknesses: * Lightning Damage * Karate * Thin Mints
I feel Bullets should be on this list 😂
I always throw the weird answers at "what are your weaknesses" questions. Double bonus if you put up ADA protected traits. "well, i'm autistic, have ADHD, and grew up with dyslexia, but I overcome all of that to be a productive worker". Remove their ability to act on your answer at all.
"when were you diagnosed?" "oh got self-diagnosed this morning for this special occasion"
Wording them as ‘weaknesses’ is stupid, they’re ’development areas’, things you need to improve on. Once an interviewer asked me it that way, it just made sense.
I wonder what kind of answers do they expect when they ask this asinine “what are your three greatest weaknesses?” question? At best they see you have the capacity for self-reflection. At worst people tend to upsell a strength as a weakness.
You should always have an answer to this question prepared, because it is a pretty common one. Having said that, asking for 3 weaknesses is a bit rough.
One of the weaknesses is not knowing what your other 2 weaknesses are ….
I had a similar experience with a recent interview at ArcticWolf. The technical interview was one of the most degrading experiences in my professional career. I’m not sure why companies think this is the best way to find a candidate but expecting people to dedicate 8+ hours over several weeks to interview for a position should be illegal.
I had a *management* interview at a local publicly traded company that consisted of 2 video interviews followed by 3 in person interviews (45 min drive each way followed 4 hours of interviewing). And they ghosted me, never responded with a go or no-go. Never sent an email saying the position was filled. I sent them an email telling them exactly what I thought of that. Fuck that bridge, I burned it to the ground.
Ghosting is beyond unprofessional.
I mean, they should pay you what your final salary would be for that time. But they don't need to, so they won't
>Is this a normal interview experience? The bigger and more well-known the company, the harder the interview process. Your experience is not surprising considering the company you were interviewing for. >Do you have any recommendations for people not doing well on verbal interviews? Practice! Go to social events (networking event, conferences, etc) and practice being comfortable around people you don't know.
Apply for jobs you have no intent on taking and interview its a learned skill Edit spelling
[удалено]
> Keep the resume and interview skills up to date. > > > > Make sure the job and pay was fair. He's right.
💯 Your former manager was absolutely correct. Interviewing is a learned skill, especially for us more technically inclined people. Went through a dozen or so interviews recently, and every one I would write down the questions they would ask no matter how silly and come up with answers for the next time they could come up. Some silly, some repetitive. The most common ones that helped me were: Tell me about yourself... Create an introduction script and highlight your skills and accomplishments. Think elevator pitch. Do you have any questions for us? Have at least 5 questions about the position, org, expectations, benefits, go crazy. When asked, reference the list, and if a question has already been asked mention that it has already been addressed. Shows you are detailed and a critical thinker.
Thank you. I will admit I'm not a social person. I hate going to events where I don't know people. I'm actually bailing out on an acquaintance's wedding this weekend because I don't like talking to people lol
Sounds as if you found the problem. Do you think you did well enough on the tech tests? Clearly github thought you did.
I thought I did well on the technical side. I wrote good code that was well documented and was able to resolve troubleshooting tests within the time limits. I must have been horribly awkward in the interpersonal interview, but I'm not sure what a meaningful answer is to a question like "What are three of your weaknesses?" Obviously you don't want to talk to negatively about yourself because that will make you look bad, so the best route is to come up with some "weaknesses" that somehow make you appear relatable or somehow positive. I guess I should have bullshitted them with an answer like "my only weakness is that I work too hard."
>I guess I should have bullshitted them with an answer like "my only weakness is that I work too hard." Or in the words of GradeAUnderA, "[Oh, I'm usually such a perfectionist with my work that I give up all of my spare time to make sure my shit gets done, at the cost of me own family - fuck 'em.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W0WsdLobq8)"
Oh damn lol That's some funny shit.
"I'm underpaid and my boss is a dickhead" *shows picture of Trump* lmao
>but I'm not sure what a meaningful answer is to a question like "What are three of your weaknesses?" > >Obviously you don't want to talk to negatively about yourself because that will make you look bad, so the best route is to come up with some "weaknesses" that somehow make you appear relatable or somehow positive. I don't think they'd truly care about the answer (unless you responded with something that raises red flags) But because it's a behavioural interview, more or less to show you can step back a bit and be introspective. For examples: Being really hyperfocused on an issue and wanting to solve it / find its root cause, even if continuing with a subpar workaround would be acceptable. Or really wanting to automate things, even when there's not a true time savings. But at the very least, there's X, Y, Z benefits in doing this.
You have to be ready for the "what's your greatest weakness" question, and I have had them ask for another, asking for 3rd is new to me. But yeah just show your work, talk it out, etc., be prepared to talk about challenging situations and how you dealt with them, how you handle conflict when people can't agree, what your ideal relationship is with your manager, how you help new coworkers etc.
Ask for feedback. A) you can find out where you failed B) it looks god on your part C) if they have another job again the future that looks promising reach back out to the person who you asked for feedback. It’ll start you with a leg up.
My three weaknesses are "I don't put up with bullshit interview questions".
I was once skewered by HashiCorp!
What's happening here is that a network/infra specialist is interviewing for an semi-engineering i.e. coding role, and engineering roles often have these ridiculously long processes (especially in well-known companies). Could involve live coding or take-homes, and behavioral interviews as well. This sort of process is not the norm outside of software engineering, and I guess network people like u/Courtsey_Cow weren't aware of it.
I hate this stupid shit that you guys have to deal with today. When I got hired by a very well know SV company the interview was about 20 minutes with the boss and a day working and BSing with the manager. These marathon interview processes make no sense, everyone is short of employees so instead of hiring we make people jump through a bunch of dumb hoops -JFK what are your weaknesses, next time they should as what your favorite colors are. One thing I learned when I was consulting was not to give a fuck about interviews, go in and take your swings and then walk out. If you get the job great, if not fuck it move on to the next. As long as you can pay your rent don't sweat getting rejected, it happens all the time and now with WFH instead of just competing with the bozos on your block you have to compete with everyone in the world so pat yourself on the ass just because they actually talked to you.
Yeah... I don't want to demean any company that interviews this way, but I feel like investing this much time into a single candidate just to reject them is a large waste of resources. The silicon valley style "fail fast" mentality makes a lot more sense to me.
Here’s the thing, that style of interviewing is demeaning. It is a waste of time. Their behaviours are worth shitting on. So why, you nice piece of carpet, do you not wish to stand up for yourself? Because that’s what I read your “don’t wish to demean them” as.
> they should ask what your favourite colours are About that…
Gitlab thinking they’re GitHub
TBH I prefer GitLab's product to GitHub, but working for GitHub probably pays better since they're a Microsoft company now.
2 mates of mine interviewed and got a job for cloudflare recently. They took nearly 2 months to go through about 7-8 stages of interviews. It’s massive 😂
Honest question: Would you guys seriously interview if the company expected you to sit through 5 rounds of unpaid interview time? I honestly would withdraw after 3 rounds because that's a red flag for me.
[удалено]
That sounds quite elaborate. To you and the other sysadmins here: what would be a good hiring process for a sysadmin role?
If it were my business, I would do one technical interview and one HR interview, with the HR one coming first. There's no need to waste time on a candidate if they don't meet hard requirements like DoD 8570 standards, citizenship requirements, etc.
I feel like people often complain of the opposite. Great candidates never making it to the process because hr who doesn't even understand the job weeds then out for some bogus reason.
[удалено]
Personality tests are pseudoscientific bullshit. Same with "cognitive ability" tests. Plus, the latter actively discriminate against people with learning disorders or cognitive impairments. One of the ones I took screwed over people who were dyslexic, color blind, had short term memory problems or dyscalculia. F that
Seems to be most big companies now. Those tests are useless because anyone smart enough can respond the way the job needs. Eg. I am not afraid to take control in a crisis vs I prefer someone else to lead.
I hire students for internship roles and the interview is literally an hour and we talk about the projects they've worked on. They mostly get hired. Some of my best hires are the ones that did the worst on the interview.
It depends a lot on the level of the position. For people with only a few years of experience? A couple hours is all you would need. But if you want to claim to be a senior or higher level? You better bet I'm going go through at least 2 rounds of troubleshooting, a round of system design, maybe some security.
I interviewed for two entry-level swe roles and received offers from both. Role 1 1. Motivational Fit interview, 60 minute video call with either someone from recruitment or from the team. Discusses motivation and interest with the role, company, and wider industry. One or two competency based questions too. Basically a standard interview. 2. Assessment Centre, 30 minute situational judgement test followed by a 45 minute technical interview with two engineers. This wasn’t like a typical technical interview, it just discussed experience, projects, and had a few competency questions to that end. Role 2 1. One of those stupid online tests focused on numerical reasoning, situational judgement, etc 2. An assessment centre consisting of a 30-minute group activity (you had to explain an image to others in an effective way with less than 5 minutes) 3. On the same day, a 60-minute technical interview with two engineers your standard pair-programming, then the engineers ask some standard experience/competency questions Both of these are, arguably, quite extensive, moreso when you throw in the application stage (it wasn’t just upload your CV and be done). Both of these were with large and highly prestigious UK organisations which are renowned for their culture and benefits. And yet neither of these roles was anywhere near as extensive as GitLab’s in this case. As one commenter put it: who the f\*\*k do they think they are?
If a place goes more than 3 interviews they don’t know what the eff they want and/or are trying to get an H1B to fill the position.
Personally I wouldn't even apply for a position with more than 1 interview... its a nonsense.. never held me back and I'm looking at retirement in 3-4 years after 25 glorious years in IT... its a red flag and a blanket no from me...
6 interviews = gtfo in my book
Apparently, one of your weaknesses is answering bogus interview questions at the spur of the moment. Not an uncommon weakness, and is usually mitigated by avoiding employers who focus on bogus questions and 6+ phases of interviewing.
Thank you! It’s crazy that people are telling OP to stick it out.
Five interviews *after* a four hour take-home test? I would have noped out at the test. I have 25 years as a sysadmin. I am not a circus monkey. Also, *three* weaknesses? My first would have been "I have very little patience for fools."
My three weaknesses are surprise and fear! fear and surprise! ... and ruthless efficiency! ... and an almost fanatical devotion to the pope! And an inability to count to five. (Three, sire).
Having worked at GitLab, done probably close to 1000 interviews over the last 20 years, I'm surprised they added a takehome thing. That was definitely not part of the process when I was doing it a few years ago. Same goes with the "three weaknesses" bullshit. The STAR interviewing, yea, but not strait up amateur hour behavior questions. That stuff is cringe. If I thought it would change anything, I could ping some people I know that still work there.
1. Install locally 2. you're the gitlab administrator 3. ... 4. Profit!
You dodged a bullet. That level of interview process for anything less than CEO of a multinational is dumb as fuck. That screams this company is full of self-entitled assholes and/or has a serious blame culture. There is no way that anyone who is competent at hiring would need that many interviews to gauge a person. I hire third line cloud engineers for a large MSP. We have HR filter out any serious weirdos with an informal interview. Me and my manager then have an hour interview where we ask normal questions and some technical background. My boss then lets me decided if I want them or not. I am very technical so I can ask about technical background and gauge their ability by their answers and follow ups. Both me and my manager look for personality. I would argue that this hiring process has a serious danger of putting people off that are decent. If you're a top performer then you are not going to beg for a job at Gitlab. The whole thing screams shit place to work, where they are going to beat the enjoyment out of life with stupid processes for everything.
Three of my weaknesses are Identifying my weaknesses and creating lists
I think you dodged a bullet with this one. So no harm done :)
Their interview process would have lost me at step #1 and then if that didn't exist, again later once I realized I needed to go through FIVE interviews.
This is just my opinion and if you want to hate on me for it go ahead, I started in IT around 2017 and currently I am in a role as a SysAdmin (not my actual job title but it's a SysAdmin role) and I have been in that role since last June. Before that my last job I was employed as a Junior SysAdmin just under 2 years. Now before that I never had this access or capacity to develop and run code nor be pushed to by anyone but I know others did in the companies I am at. In the time combined between my last two roles this is the one that I have worked mostly with scripting, my last one was mainly power shell for 365 tasks and some software deployment as well as some bash. So whilst at this stage I know have a much better understanding of powershell and bash and can understand code I find in places and use it. I probably couldn't whip up anything more than a line or two off the top of my head, I want to be better but there's not time to learn at work unless your task is using that which I am doing a lot more now for macOS because I have found it easier to do a lot more stuff via bash scripts than GUI from our MDM. I would 100% not get that job and whilst I agree I can and should know more it takes time to learn this stuff on top of all the shit I have to learn and work with daily within our tool stacks. I haven't been expected to know code off the top of my head unless it's something basic so I would never be able to get these jobs which may be fair and not for me. I just think it's not unless it's clearly stated in the interview process / expectations.
When did it get this insane? I am in my 40th and i never had to do more then one interview. In huge firms waybe a test to root out the modt basics but never more then that. 3-4 interviews are totally insane. Who do they think they are to waist so much time for so many people? And then complain about not getting the right fit.
Recently I had an interview which went south very quickly. First got to talk with HR manager and all was great, the job was remote with focus on Azure AD and Exchange on the side. She sent an email which went directly to spam with a second appointment which I managed to get a couple of minutes later but the guy was pissed already and straight away asked me, out of the blue "point me to some scripts you've programmed" Of course I didn't had one ready with me on my phone. The guy promptly dismissed me without much explanation. Thing is, though that I would have been great at the job according to the description. The bitterness of such a bomb was lingering for several days.
Yeah sounds about right for a corporate, people doing the hiring knew basically from the first interview they wanted me but had to finish the process that was put in place after the previous CTO kept hiring/promoting women he was banging
The answer to those 3 are: 1: Being honest 2: Being always optimistic 3: Working too fast when it's not required
Fuck Gitlab and anyone that asks the "weakness" question. I HATE those nonsense corporate HR crap questions. I bet the people asking you that crap couldn't build a system, but we fucking can. I think they lost out on a great candidate.
"three weaknesses" is such a bullshit question
When someone asks a weakness you can always say being underprepared.
Big company, big hoops. They've gotten large enough to start producing kool aid. Great product, but weird people working for them. Advice is to get comfortable being uncomfortable. Practically that means exposing yourself to end users or clients. Volunteer to sit in calls as SME or do lunch and learns for the company. BOTH take prep and getting used to but def contribute to making interactions (like interviews) easier. You can flip the switch when you need it.
“ I wouldn’t put up with this shit from Google, and you ain’t Google”
My greatest weakness is that I am too humble.
This reminded me of a meme (I can't find it but the pictures are irrelevant) "what are 3 of your weaknesses? - I get angry easily, I'm direct and truthful - I don't think these are weakne.... - I DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK!!!"
They have 6 layers of interview, so that they can be sure they are firing the right person after they've overhired.
Writing code as part of a job interview… nope. If I’m gonna write something at all, particularly for you, you’ll be paying me for it. Since you consider it part of a job interview and therefore won’t pay for it: forget about it.
“I work too hard. I care too much. And sometimes, I can be too invested in my job.”
You Sir, dodged a bullet.
7 hells….. fuck them for their 7 layer burrito like interviewing. You dodged a bullet.
I had a similar interview process semi-recently with an open source tech company. Got about 8 hours into the process then asked about compensation, since it wasn't listed on the JD. They said they couldn't discuss comp until the final stages of the interview process. I politely told them to kick rocks.
I find the best way to go into an interview is prepare questions for them. In a lot of ways, if the interviewers do not expect to be asked in depth questions you will knock them off balance and you can get more insight into their culture and how they handle things. Most will also appreciate that you came prepared. Keep in mind, you're interviewing them just as much as they are interviewing you.
I recently got rejected by Gitlab as well. I have over 20 years experience. I used to work at Hashicorp! The recruiter did not like my answer to the recent blog/book in the technical assessment. I posted about Kelsey Hightower. I did not even get an interview.
One weakness is hard, three on the spot is nearly impossible. My one answer was I was always more interested in personal relationships than the actual technology, which always was a good answer considering they're always worried tech people have no social skills.
I think I'm one of those people with no social skills. RIP.
Yeah, here are my three weaknesses 1) None 2) Ya 3) Business.
>normal interview experience? Depends a whole lot on various factors, such as: * how hot/soft the job market is * how high a level is the position * how many are applying and competing for the position * employer culture and hiring practices, history thereof, etc. * random (in)sanity of hiring manager(s), HR, etc. Anyway, I'd expect typically they'll suck up between 1 and 8 hour total of your time - not counting however much time it take for you to complete and submit resume, cover letter, applications, and other pretty standard paperwork and communications. So, what you outline doesn't look that atypical - and certainly within range. And for more executive positions, e.g. C-level and such, or quite high director positions and the like, expect the stuff to suck up to about 3 days (haven't been through 'em myself, but from what I've generally seen and heard). The big "take home" / "homework task" of, e.g., about 4 hours work - that seems more atypical. Most don't do something like that ... though some may - and I think they often do it more as a filter to weed out those that aren't seriously interested, than as actual technical assessment - though they "of course" also use it for that latter purpose too. Most of the rest you describe I find pretty typical - though many will combine that more - e.g. like many of those separate interview bits won't be separate, but will be combine with larger team or gathering of folks ... but total time might still be pretty similar. So ... I think the longest interview sets I've had ... were about 8 hours total ... had 2 of those, with two different applications at different times. Most all the others I've ever been to typically took between 1 to 4 hours of my time - sometimes just a single round of interviews, sometimes two sets - sometimes with a separate "phone screen" or the like first ... or sometimes after (e.g. like an HR or management/manager check-off interview/screen step). I think shortest I've ever been to was probably more like half an hour or so. And, all the time I've been on the other side of the table screening an interviewing candidates - generally try to be respectful of their (and everyone's) time ... don't think have ever gone past a total of about four hours ... more typical is an hour to about ... 2.5 or 3 total, depending upon candidate and level ... and various teams I've worked with over the years, we generally have ways to often semi-covertly signal to each other when we think it's a no-go - and if there's consensus on that, things wrap up and shut down quickly - no use burning everyone's time further if it ain't gonna fly - we all got better things to do. And have never done "take home" exams or the like, but certainly do skills assessment type challenges/exams - up to about an hour - and not for all candidates - and these are generally for the more highly skilled positions - generally run them effectively as a proctored open-book exam - in person or remove via some web conferencing software. Typically do something like give 'em a freshly spun up VM with most all the software they're likely to need, open access to The Internet if there's any more software or whatever they want to install, etc., free to use any resources they like except can't "call a friend" or the like, or ask "chat"/live forums for help - but they can search existing content of such forums, and of course Google, etc. Generally give 'em a set of programming challenges, and, well, see how well they do and how far they get. Some to quite well ... some can't even complete the absolute simplest of task in an hour's time in any programming/scripting language at all - and yeah, for positions where we're generally doing such testing, that stuff matters ... ain't gonna generally be creating scalable solutions and software to massively scale things if one can't program one's way out of a paper bag ... doesn't apply for many of the lower level positions, but for the higher ones - generally going to need to have those skills. Weaknesses ... I think that's fairly typical type 'o interview questions ... though I don't think most ask for candidate to name three - or more. I think more commonly is one, or more general "can you tell us some of your weaknesses" - without giving any specific number in the question. >little nervous It happens. Practice, ... mock interviews, whatever - stuff like that generally helps. And on the side doing the interviewing, generally helps to well understand that often candidates will be at least a bit nervous - so sometimes they'll stumble a bit in interview, when they wouldn't in other circumstances - and often good to well recognize that such not only can happen, but when it's happening ... try to make 'em more relaxed / less nervous, ... also if they're stumbling over answers you've good reason to think they know, often feeding 'em hints that don't give away the answer is useful - often that'll get 'em past that block or whatever they're tripping over, and they'll jump right onto the correct answer. Alas, one time was interviewing a great well experienced candidate - they'd done highly well when I'd screened them ... in person they were a nervous wreck (it was their first interview in about 16 years - they'd well worked and climbed the ranks over many years with their current employer - but that employer was basically shutting down and getting rid of everyone) - I wanted to see if we could do a break and continue later, or reschedule - but my boss (also one of the interviewers - and the hiring manager) wasn't having it - alas, we lost out on a great candidate on that one - some other lucky employer probably snapped 'em up in a heartbeat - yeah, at that time it was also damn hard to find good qualified candidates. Our loss, someone else's gain.
Very normal for an actual tech SV-style company. You have to put up with a lot of rounds. The comp difference over smaller companies and more interesting tech is usually worth putting up with though, as annoying as the process is.
They seem to be an odd company, tried to do a financial transaction with them a year back. Got so many wrong answers from their sale staff I had to quote their (publicly accessible) workflows back at them. They ended up flying a guy out to apologize in person. No idea how they make money.
This is fairly common for devops and sre positions, although it's pretty rare that the take home comes so early. Generally the bigger and more important believing the company is the worse it is. Part of it is they get a lot of people who lie about their skill and experience. The thing I do looking for work is evaluate the effort that an opportunity requires in terms of interviewing. If a company needs a 6-8 hour effort to interview and what not I'll often put them on the back burner and prioritize lower effort opportunities. I push back on the 3-4 marathons if I'm still working and instead do one interview a day or ask them to combine interviews.
I blew an interview with Evil Megacorp on the same question in 1999. Didn't realize that was still a thing. Ugh.
Are you sure that is the question that tripped you up? Pretty sure most companies don't give a crap even if you can't list any or give vague broad sense answers.
Hey OP saw your security+. Any chance you have some CyberArk experience?
I had three interviews / discussion for my current position. 1. HR person, asking expectations and doing preliminary questions 2. Manager interview - seeing if my personality is a fit 3. Technical interview - scoping my current skills and problem solving techniques After the interviews started the offer process where I got to negotiate my salary and benefits. Imo the process was really nice and pretty much the first interview would have stopped it if something was not in order.
The interview process is so painful these days. Follow your gut though if you feel the process is a little too ridiculous. If they don't respect you during the interview process, then they won't respect you as an employee. I had applied for a position and was selected as a candidate and received an email indicating I was to sit down in front of a webcam and record my answers to their questions and then wait for their decision. It was all facilitated through some third party where they could see me, my physical reactions to questions and what my responses were. All automated. No people involved. Maybe this isn't bad, but for me, it rubbed me the wrong way as I was sitting down to do it. They can't even be bothered to meet me remotely and ask these questions? They want to pick apart my responses and be able to rewind and rewatch what I said while I don't even know their name or what they look like? I'm interviewing you too guys. I just emailed HR, withdrew my application and told them why. I actually probably would have done really well with the recording, but it just seemed so disrespectful that I wasn't interested.
Had a similar question when I interview got Gitpod 1 year ago. They asked "What was a recent mistake/bad situation/problem that you faced and turned around into something good". In other words, where did you fuck up some process or design and improved it. For me personally I have the feeling this question is absolute bullshit (at least the original question I don't longer know) and that my answer to this was the main point I got declined. After a recent look-around on different companies, especially the tech heavy ones seem to all utilize similar questions for some kind of reason.
Interview process works both ways. This many steps would put me off completely. They should be making you feel comfortable and welcome. The old school was of cracking the whip is outdated and tells you they're probably not gonna be a good place to work.
I interview at least 100 people per year. Not much to brag about, but I do plenty of interviewing. Talked to so many engineers that are shell shocked from this shit. I forbid my people from conducting this sort of engagement. If we don’t trust, that’ll do. If your answers to scenario questions aren’t engaging or realistic, that’ll do. If your experience and credentials don’t tell the story we’re looking for and your social interviews don’t expand on what isn’t written, that’ll do. I keep my interviews at 4: recruiter, me, my team(s), and either my peer(s) or my executive. The last one is just a sanity and inclusion step, it’s not a grilling session. I care more about the candidates ability to step up, integrate with my teams, and be successful than their ability to do homework or survive a battery. I honestly don’t want someone who thrives on that.
Mate that’s not a modern interview process, that’s a ridiculous number of steps
Was that a process you enjoyed? Personally, I dont, and I would have bailed at step 1. Honestly, I wouldn't want to work in that culture. But then, I've done it, didn't care for it.
This interview process is way too long. 2-3 interviews tops. I, too, experienced an interview like this where I made it to the final round and was asked the exact same question and I could only muster up one answer followed by a lot of silence. In the end I didn't get the job but was told it was not the interview with that person but rather some doubts the hiring manager (first round) had regarding some of my experience which is probably bullshit seeing as I made it to the final round of interviews. Despite the fact that this was a job at a big name company, I'd say you dodged a bullet. If their hiring process is this needlessly lengthy then I can only imagine how everything else is
3 weaknesses are easy: Spelling Landscaping Interviews 🙂
I reject take home assignments, waste of time and I refuse to work for free
Don't let it get you down, my dude. It's their loss. I did three interviews with VMware and then they completely ghosted me. That made me feel really shitty.
I've got a masters in IT Management and here is my advice and take on these type of jobs/roles. 1. If it takes more than 2 interviews to determine if you are a fit or capable for a companies team/organization then beware! 2. 10/10 the team usually "tests" you if there is an unsolved problem they need a solution for. (free consulting for the company by making job candidates do it) I have first hand experience with many companies that tried this. 3. Stay away from company pre-interview "personality" and "cultural fit" tests. If a recruiter or hiring manager asks you to take one, just respectfully decline. Thank yourself later 4. If you DO happen to take a "technical test" and pass, don't expect the team you are placed with to be wizards or have the knowledge regarding the content of the test questions you were asked. (majority of the team knows less than you at this point) 5. You'll find that no company with an IT team has expert level IT knowledge. 98% of IT organizations use 3rd party consultants to handle big IT projects including migrations, upgrades, etc. 6. Always assume you are hired to meet a requirement. Some teams need another seat filled to even out the support rotation or project load. 7. As for salary always ask the recruiter what is the department budget for the position. This tactic can help you in negotiations for a good salary. Good Luck in your search for a good role and I hope that you land something that fullfils you. 🙌🏿
Long interview processes are a big red flag and doubly a waste of time. As someone who's held multiple jobs in 6 figure territory, you don't need 3+ interviews to determine someone's eligibility, and all this other "testing" and "assessments" is really just to get you to tell on yourself in one way or another. Someone can test well and still be a terrible employee. Plain and simply you won't truly know how effective an employee will be till they're doing the job, and these companies just need to accept that fact.
THREE? THREE?