Slashdot Log In
Do You Tell a Job Candidate How Badly They Did?
Posted by
Cliff
on Wed Jan 10, 2007 07:45 PM
from the let-the-job-market-sort-it-out dept.
from the let-the-job-market-sort-it-out dept.
skelter asks: "I have been lamenting with friends in the industry about interviewing woes and the candidates that we find. Consider a hypothetical job candidate comes in after some how making it through screening. In the team technical interview they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that not only is he (or she) not as adequate as he thinks he is, but has demonstrated that he is a danger to any code base. Do you tell them? Quietly step away, usher them out and say nothing? Play with them on the whiteboard the way your cat plays with injured mice? Should you leave them as their own warning to others? Is there any obligation to guide them to gaining real experience? Can you give them any advice or is it all liability?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Depends how much of a dick you are... (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of my job applications in the past have never got a response. It's a lot easier if you don't want to employ / deal with someone to simply ignore them after the failed interview etc. There's no obligation to respond to every application you get with helpful tips for next time. If you get as far as interview, it's nice to know why you didn't succeed but you shouldn't expect it.
As for playing with them like your cat plays with injured mice, I don't want to even apply for your company. What the hell? If you're asking about liability, that might be a sticking point. Or, more seriously, how do you think telling an applicant the reason for not getting the job would make you liable? Unless you don't employ people who are black, disabled, female and so on as a matter of course. If you told someone they were the best damn whatever you ever saw, and afterwards they didn't get a job as a whatever, maybe - just maybe you could be liable. It would be very, very weak though.
As a company, you don't owe anyone an explanation, at all in most countries. So long as you're doing things in accordance with law anyway.
Re:Depends how much of a dick you are... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Be kind rewind.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway since their application, resume, and references were adequate for them to get to the interview, it would be a good time to figure out what they actually know, and how they wound up confused about the requirements for the job (Even if you know theyre just lying). Sometimes when 8 usd/hr is mentioned the applicant expects near zero experience to do the job. Five extra minutes of good PR time can help the image of your company /department.
Storm
Parent
Nope (Score:5, Interesting)
Mum's the word. (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, don't post on slashdot about it, he may be incompetent, but he may still read slashdot.
Just... (Score:5, Funny)
Scream something random to people in the next room at unpredictable intervals.
By the time the interview's over, a callback will be the last thing they're wondering about.
Depends on the situation (Score:5, Funny)
That said, I think in many circumstances, it can be a good thing to explain to somebody why they didn't get the gig. If they undertake a course of self improvement, they could potentially apply for a different position in a few years and prove a really valuable asset. Before I left my last job, there was a huge amount of bitterness related to internal job applications for position transfers. People would be rejected with no idea why. It was killing morale. I don't know if they ever improved the situation, but it would have been really easy to say,
"Look, Suzie Q, when we open up to public applications, most of the people applying for this type of position have qualifications X,Y, and Z in these amounts. You only have X, and only in this amount. So, it's not personal, but I think we are going to keep looking. If you really want to move into this position, we really think that only A and not B will be the best route to getting Y and Z."
Instead, with really vague requirements, people thought they were perfectly qualified, and had no idea how to get better-qualified. They also thought that it was just a matter of personal grudges.
With external applicants, I think it is less important, but it doesn't usually hurt. I suppose you might consider it valuable to keep some of the stunning idiots in the industry in hopes that they will work with your competitors. But, you may eventually work with them too. And, you will have to maintain their code. Probably safer for everybody just to point out to them how clueless they are.
And, when I'm away from my day job, I do theater stuff. I was recently involved in some auditions to expand an improv troupe I am in. Not everybody got individual commentary, but the folks dismissed in the first round did at least get a general explanation. Everybody who made it past the first cut got an explanation of what impressed the director, and what he thought they could most work on - both the folks who made it and those who didn't. Personally, I wish we could have taken a little more time to offer personal advice to some of the folks in the first round. I would have liked suggesting that the hot chicks take classes that I can sit in on and watch them learn. Especially one blonde. I tried to convince the director that she should join the troupe and just not be allowed to say anything. I would have been cool with that.
Re:Depends on the situation (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Touchy subject and legal ramifications (Score:5, Interesting)
BTW, I never "toy" with candidates. AAMOF, I try to go out of my way to keep them relaxed and not discouraged if things aren't going well. The point of the interview is to try to assess their abilities and appropriateness for the job, not to make myself feel superiour or have a team of folks that "interview well" but can't code worth a darn. I also don't want to exclude people because they "don't interview well". Some folks just get nervous, and I would hate to pass on someone good just because of that (after all, how many of us know other techies that are awesome at what they do, but have a few issues with their "social graces").
I just wish to be contacted AT ALL (Score:5, Insightful)
It's your responsibility to tell them. (Score:5, Insightful)
The QB's name? Johnny Unitas [wikipedia.org].
If I've learned nothing else in life, it's that building good relationships with people will get you further than anything else. I've also learned that it's important to serve as a mentor to people.
If you tell them in a kindly manner that they're not applying for a job they're qualified for, and that they should modify their job searches to meet their existing skill sets, you saved them tons of job-hunting trouble. (If you express it well and they still don't pay you any heed, it's their own damned fault.)
Having been on both sides of that interview table, I know how much it matters to that individual. And both your personal success and your company's success depend on the relationships you build.
The key thing about building relationships is that you have to have that function activated all the time; you can't just turn it on selectively. If you're selective, you become a two-faced suck-up, and people will know that's what you are -- to say nothing of the opportunities you'll miss when you treat someone like shit and they one day turn out to be big-time.
Every person who ever succeeded faced rejection at some point by someone else. Be damned sure that they remember those things. They remember who gave them assistance along the way, and those who did not.
Moreover, when that one rejectee does succeed, and tells all his admirers and fans about that time you shot him down for a job, is he going to talk about how you helped steer him in the right direction, or how you were an asshole?
Don't be that asshole. Be like Art Rooney. Help the candidate out.
As someone who is searching/interviewing now... (Score:5, Insightful)
We did it only once (Score:5, Insightful)
He emailed us and asked why he hadn't gotten the position. We made the mistake of politely explaining what our issues with him were. He used that explanation to kick off some sort of lawsuit against our company.
I actually have no idea how it ultimately turned out. HR told us never to do that again, legal took charge of the matters with every expectation to fight this tooth and nail (especially to avoid a precedent against our company). I presume it's either still outstanding, he lost, or he gave up, because I think I would have heard if it had gone against us.
If someone asks us how they did in an interview now (and we're not planning on offering them a job), it's, "Well, we have a lot of candidates to examine, we'll contact you if we're interested in a second interview or need more information. If you have questions about your performance in the interview, we suggest you contact a career counselor who is better equipped and has the appropriate training to answer questions like that."
Taking Advice (Score:5, Insightful)
The lesser reason is that they deserve some help in their job seeking, given that they have gone to the trouble of attending the interview.
But reason #1: I want to see how they respond to friendly advice. I don't want to hire people who can't take advice.
Consider the source of the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Consider that the problem could be you. When I've been "corrected" on coding problems in the past; it typically indicated that the interviewer was asking the wrong questions. Don't expect people to write perfect error-checking, choose your favorite algorithm, naming convention, ect.
For example, I once had to write an algorithm that had to handle money. I chose a slow and reliable algorithm, and the interviewer chastised me to not writing the fastest once possible. (He never told me he was looking for speed.) When I politley explained that I always choose a reliable algorithm that can be replaced with a fast one, as needed, he refused to listen to me, and probably thought that I was a risk to his code base.
In another internview, I was chastised for not performing extensive (and redundant) input checking. Typically, in whiteboard coding where the goal is to demonstrate an algorithm, one does not worry about minor details. Again, the interviewer probably though that I was a risk to his code base because my first reaction to his problem wasn't to follow his error-checking style.
So, perhaps instead of correcting someone's code, ask them why they wrote it the way they did. The answer to, "Why did you choose a slow algorithm?" or "Why aren't you performing null checking?" could be valid because the interviewer thinks you're looking for something else.
Re:Pass the trash... (Score:5, Interesting)
How about "I don't wish my shareholders to go to hell for owning shares in an evil company". ?
You can have self interest and still not be a dick. You lose very little, while this other person may get helped a lot. Furthermore, maybe the person will actually improve themselves and reapply for the job and you'll have a good employee then. Or, the person will work within the given industry and not bad mouth your company. The more good workers are in the economy the more services can be provided to each other and quality of life of people can improve.
Parent
Re:Pass the trash... (Score:5, Insightful)
That opinion is just plain wrongheaded, and I'll tell you why.
Even if the candidate doesn't get the job because they weren't qualified, you want them to be excited about the company. It's good PR for *you* and that most certainly is a good reason to treat your candidates respectfully.
If they still like your company even though they didn't get the job, they will direct other people they know to you (many of whom may be more skilled than the person you turned away), and they may even try again down the road when they have more experience themselves.
You may not realize this, but even developers and other technical people are social animals (no matter how much we sometimes deny it) and word gets around pretty fast. The bad companies get pointed out to friends who point them out to their friends (and on down the line). That's something we all know too well. However, the other case is also true - the GOOD companies get pointed out too.
Treat your candidates poorly (and treating them as a disposable commodity that doesn't deserve "another second more" is treating them poorly), and after a while, you will only get poor candidates.
Parent
Re:Pass the trash... (Score:5, Interesting)
I am not in the business of career counseling. I don't think that makes me evil.
-Isaac
Parent
Re:Pass the trash... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's almost like saying "If my eyes are closed, you can't see me."
Personally, I think that's a bad practice, but I'm not in much of a position to change it.
Now that I have that out of the way, I just want to say that my comment wasn't just about providing meaningful feedback (which some of us ask for and honestly want), but also about his attitude of "anyone whom I don't deem worthy is not worth another second of my time."
That sort of attitude bleeds through into the interview and it really turns off potential candidates. As a result, they let their friends know (who, as I said, let theirs know, etc). Deapite what he seems to think as evidenced by his response, treating a person like a real person is not just for career councilors.
I've walked out of interviews at places where the technical people displayed the "I am god and you must impress me, pesant" mentality, because I don't want to work in that sort of an environment. I know a lot of other really competent people who have done the same.
You want your company to present a truly positive face to potential hires (and, as an interviewer, you *are* the face of the company to the people you are interviewing) because that is one of the things that make people *want* to work for you. If they're excited about the company, whether or not they got the job, they will tell other people.
In the end if you can make your potential hires excited about your company, you have a lot better chance of getting really solid, quality people even if you don't hire that particular person, because word of mouth is extremely important.
Parent
Re:Pass the trash... (Score:5, Insightful)
He COULD go to work for one of your vendors...
Parent
Re:Pass the trash... (Score:5, Insightful)
Building relationships is key to business success, and today's losers have a way of turning into tomorrow's winners. They tend to be highly motivated.
That does not mean you have any obligation to candidates who are clearly not qualified at the current time. But history is full of people who could only get jobs a lowly patent clerks and yet wind up revolutionizing our understanding of the universe. Or who drop out of university and found companies that change industries.
Not every loser grows up to be a winner, but enough do, and they are hard enough to recognize, that it would be extremely foolish to say that you have zero reason to spend another second on someone. epsilon reason, maybe. But not zero.
The rational incentive to help others is so obvious that it hardly needs pointing out, but one place to start is: do you want to live in a world where there are people who help others? If so, there is exactly one way of ensuring that you do. Think about it for long enough and you'll figure out what it is. And companies exist embedded in the social landscape, so despite not being human they share similar incentives.
Parent
Re:True Story (Score:5, Insightful)
Is addicted to crack.
Fucks his mom.
Can't program worth a shit.
Is a fucking idiot.
I'm too lazy to make an account, but do you see how that works?
Asshole.
Parent
Re:Honesty would help (Score:5, Insightful)
You start believing crap from people less able then yourself because they have a job and you don't. I've seen very able people give up looking and take jobs in different feilds because each rejection makes them think they are less capable.
Parent
Re:Not a word! (Score:5, Funny)
That guy went on to get a Nobel Prize for the said research in 2005 and now he opens his talks by showing the "fuckoff" rejection letter...
Luckily for the idiot that wrote the letter, Dr. Marshall magnanimously blacks out the name and the sig!
The lesson here is: be nice to "insecure geeks."
Parent
Re:Discrimination? (Score:5, Funny)
How's that?
I'm over 60, and I've been in IT since the late '70s.
I have less than 6 years of experience.
(between naps, lunch, and endless meetings)
Parent