
Walking out of an interview - DanielShir
http://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/3492/is-it-rude-to-leave-an-interview-early-if-you-have-already-made-your-decision
======
patio11
My answer on this depends on whether we want to be an emotionally supportive
group for people who make a badge of honor out of being socially and
professionally inept, or whether we want to give advice which will actually
move careers forward.

A company which is not a cultural good fit for you, and the employees thereof,
can _still be very valuable allies._ I would not act to antagonize them absent
substantial provocation. _Not being like you is not a substantial
provocation._ Most people in the world will, after all, not be like you, and
you'll end up not working for approximately all companies in the industry.
That's OK.

You've already got the day blocked off in your calendar. Smile. Firm
handshakes. Thank them for taking the time to interview you. Heck, they're
giving you free live-fire practice for your next interview, _make the most out
of it_. You should never say a word of criticism about the company to anyone
but your primary point of contact and you should be darn circumspect with how
you word it to him. (I like something along the general lines of "Thanks for
your time and allowing me to get to know $FOO_CORP better. We're really in the
same boat: I only want to work at employers where I'd do my best work, and you
only want to hire people who'd do great things at $FOO_CORP. Having had the
opportunity to hear you guys out a bit more, I don't think we're a great
mutual fit. _I will keep my ears open for you in case any of my friends would
be a good fit for your position._ ")

~~~
doktrin
This is spot on. I can't even fathom why somebody would needlessly burn
bridges like this. The fact that we live in boom times and enjoy near-
unprecedented demand for our skills is no excuse for this type of myopic
behavior.

What really surprised me was that the OP's candidate was a referral. It's one
thing to risk burning your _own_ bridges, but it's completely inconsiderate to
possibly tarnish the reputation of someone who spoke up on your behalf.
Speaking for myself, unless this was a close personal friend, I would be very
reluctant to ever subsequently recommend this individual again.

Without delving into anecdotes, I've witnessed a scenario quite similar to
this one. A candidate who was referred (as a "rockstar") struggled with the
technical interview, and subsequently walked out. It goes without saying how
he, and to a lesser extent the individual who referred him, were viewed in the
aftermath.

TLDR; Please don't do this. It's completely unnecessary and possibly
inconsiderate.

~~~
masterzora
Did the candidate really risk burning bridges? If he said "fuck you, fuck
this, fuck everything, I'm out" then clearly that's just a shitty way to go
about it. If he said something closer to "Thank you all for your time. You're
doing fascinating work but I don't think that this would be a good fit. I
really enjoyed meeting you all and maybe I'll get a chance to work with some
of you on a future project." and they decided that was burning a bridge then
that is a bridge worth burning.

As an interviewer, I'd have a higher opinion of someone willing to cut an
interview short if they realise it's not really going to end well and as a
candidate, as long as the company hasn't spent money to fly me out somewhere
or something, it's an option I like having on the table for an all-day
interview since there's not much point in tiring oneself out if it's not going
anywhere.

~~~
doktrin
>> _If he said something closer to "Thank you all for your time. You're doing
fascinating work but I don't think that this would be a good fit. I really
enjoyed meeting you all and maybe I'll get a chance to work with some of you
on a future project." and they decided that was burning a bridge then that is
a bridge worth burning._

That is certainly not the impression I got from reading the OP :

"At one point when he was asked to move to another conference room he decided
he had enough and said that he was done with the interview and wanted to
leave."

"When he went to leave the lead jumped into the elevator with him and asked
him why he didn't want to continue"

We're forced to interpret a 2nd hand retelling of the events, but everything
points to this individual leaving relatively abruptly. Why else would someone
feel the need to run after him into the elevator?

~~~
masterzora
We have way too little to go on to actually decide which way the candidate
went. We have one side of the story second-hand filtered via our own
interpretations. Thing of it is, given just what we know I could spend ages
listing out credible ways it could have gone given what we have.

Assume that the candidate did give something closer to my latter statement.
Perhaps the lead wanted a better explanation of what made the fit so poor.
Perhaps the lead actually could not comprehend anyone not wanting to work
there. Perhaps the lead didn't believe the explanation given. Any of these
could feasibly lead to the same account we're given, as could simply leaving
abruptly or literally saying "fuck you, fuck this, fuck everything".

~~~
doktrin
Yes, we may not have all the facts. For all we know the entire story is a
fabrication.

However, my point is simply that based on the _only available account we have_
, there's nothing to indicate this candidate was particularly diplomatic.

~~~
masterzora
And my point is that there's nothing to indicate that this candidate was
particularly undiplomatic so it's rather senseless to attack them for burning
bridges. This is a situation where, given sensible people, bridges will only
be burned with the particularly undiplomatic route.

~~~
doktrin
Agree to disagree, I suppose.

------
rwhitman
I once declined an offer over email and promptly got a conference call back
from them where the CEO was incredibly hostile, the purpose of the call seemed
like the CEO just wanted to publicly berate me and tell me that I was making a
bad move.

Afterwards I realized that its entirely a subconscious alpha dominance thing.
There's this unsaid very primal, tribal power trip that goes along with the
interviewee vs employer relationship.

As the interviewer you want to be holding the power card - you sit in a
position of power and have other people dance around and do what you say in
order for you to be able to judge _them_ and make them prove their worth to
you in order to join your tribe.

Its really one of the few times we get to break down our democratic social
structure and revert back to this primitive social order in adulthood, so its
a pretty important ritual for alpha-types.

When someone comes in and disrupts that natural boundary it becomes offensive
as they've unconsciously told you "I don't respect you as a leader" in front
of your staff and team. The interviewer then needs to re-affirm their ego and
dominance over the tribal unit in a public display.

If you look at all these articles floating around about judging candidates and
"top grading" and you look at it from this tribal alpha-dominance perspective
it really breaks down some of what we assume is necessary in hiring. I think
the whole system is based around some silly ancient ritual that we haven't
been able to shake from our culture.

~~~
001sky
This is a very interesing note. It is undubitably a real phenomenon. A
counterfactual case, however, might exist. Consider a similar non-hierarchical
situation. For example, the relationship between a host and guest (at a
private party). Where you were the guest of honor. As the guest of honour, you
are not at the dis-advantage of power. In fact, just the opposite. But, the
same question can be asked..."If you were the guest of honor at a party and
the party sucks, is it OK to leave early?" If so, how would you handle it?

~~~
rwhitman
That is very interesting, I definitely think you're right about it in the
context of the article's scenario. By abruptly leaving the party early the
guest of honor is essentially telling the host "I don't respect you".

It may be more a simple social etiquette thing than a hierarchy thing, but the
fact that the host has leadership representing their group here probably
infuses it with some level of asserting dominance in response to public
disrespect.

Basically walking out on an interview is a great way to disrespect the
interviewer, and you probably shouldn't do it if you don't want a fight ;)

------
snowwrestler
I think a situation like this is better handled one on one--wait for a natural
break, pull the interview lead aside and explain politely that you appreciate
the time and consideration but think it is just not a good fit culturally.
Then the lead can explain it to everyone else and excuse them from the rest of
the interview process.

Announcing any kind of surprise or unwelcome news can be problematic in a
group situation. When people have an emotional response, they want to express
it, and in a group situation the mutual reinforcement can quickly scale up the
emotion.

This is why it's generally not a good idea to quit by standing up in a staff
meeting and announcing it to everyone at once (unless you're trying to make a
scene :-)). It's much smoother to tell your boss first, so that they can help
manage the emotion of the team.

~~~
wccrawford
From what I can tell of the story, he was never left alone with 1 person at
any time. He was ushered from room to room, meeting groups of people the whole
time.

Personally, I think the culture sounds great. But if he didn't, there's no
point in wasting his whole day there. He was polite in telling them that he
didn't think he'd fit and there was no need to waste anyone's time.

Had this been a 2-hour interview, instead of a whole day, I'd say stick it out
and be friendly. But not a whole day.

~~~
snowwrestler
There's usually a lead for an interviewing process like this, and I don't
think it would be that hard to say something like "hey can I have a word for a
minute" as you're transitioning between groups.

~~~
billswift
Even if there is, that doesn't mean he'll know who the lead is. I have been in
interview where I have gone from person to person with no one in two
consecutive sections. As far as I could tell there was no one person to
discuss sensitive issues with.

~~~
snowwrestler
Wow, interesting, thanks. What did you think of that process--did you end up
hiring on there?

------
jlintz
I debated doing this once. I was still in college interviewing for an entry
level position where the company found my resume on some job site and invited
me for an interview.

I arrived at the place and was told to go into a large conference room. In the
room were about 30 other people all staring at each other wondering what just
happened. We were all given a coding test in Java (Java was no where on my
resume and I had zero experience with it). After answering what I could with C
we were broken up into teams and started a Jeopardy style game on Java and
XML. I can't imagine they gained any insight into any candidate with this game
since so many different people were answering questions.

Once the game was finished we were then kept in our teams and given
engineering problems to work out as a group and then had to present the
solutions to the "judges". Every team was pretty much told their answers
sucked, I can only compare the feedback to something out of the TV show
"Apprentice."

I left the interview completely dumbfounded as to what just happened. People
had flown in from out of state to be there for the interview and were blind
sided by this horrendous group interview that felt like it took place solely
to stroke the ego of the guy leading the whole charade. I also remember the
head guy preaching to us that Java was the future and if we didn't learn it
we'd be left behind.

~~~
Spooky23
I had something like this happen to me, except it was a bait and switch --
they lured you in with some interesting job, but it turned out they were
interviewing 75 people for 8 jobs.

At the end, they offered everyone (as in "ok, everyone, you're all a good fit
for position EY535353-1") for some horrific job debugging JCL or something to
everyone for like $18/hr (this was in 1999), and didn't hire anyone for the
good gigs. By that time, the whole crowd was getting unruly, and we basically
stormed out.

~~~
goatforce5
Years ago I went in for some job where they were advertising a salary of
something like GBP35k-40k. I met with their tech guy, got passed up to the CEO
and everything is going well.

CEO says something like "You'd be a great fit. Just take this coding test and
go complete it in that meeting room over there. And BTW, we can only afford to
pay you 25k." "I thought it said 35k." "Yes, but we can't afford that and no
one will come for interviews if we say 25k."

I took the test and sat in the meeting room by myself for a few minutes, then
went back to the CEO and said I wasn't interested. He kinda shrugged and said
fair enough, and gave me a coffee cup with their logo on it for my troubles.

I think they ended up going public a few years later. It might have actually
worked out OK for me in the end, ironically enough.

~~~
shaggyfrog
> BTW, we can only afford to pay you 25k." "I thought it said 35k." "Yes, but
> we can't afford that and no one will come for interviews if we say 25k."

How scummy. That should be an immediate dealbreaker. They've been lying to you
even before you knew about their job posting. So you gotta ask yourself if
that kind of behaviour will get better, or worse, with time.

------
mootothemax
I remember being sent to an interview for a PHP developer, only for it to
transpire that the company was actually after a Perl developer. The
recruitment agent had sent me along anyway, having helpfully added a couple of
lines to my CV.

The strange thing was that after I explained what had happened (after 15 or so
minutes of initial interview fun) and said something like "Thanks for taking
the time to see me, and sorry it couldn't be more productive," the
interviewers were suddenly really keen on me; I was standing halfway through
the door, answering questions for a good few minutes until I worked out how to
leave, much to the interviewers' reluctance.

Had I more sense at the time (I was 18 or 19 then), I would've sat down the
extra ten minutes and tried to work out if we could've done business together
one way or another. So whilst there are definitely times to leave early,
nowadays I wouldn't be too hasty in doing so.

~~~
yxhuvud
Why limit yourself to PHP? Be upfront with what you don't know, and if they
are still interested, see if they seem nice to work for.

Good developers have an easier time producing good things in a language they
don't know than bad people in a language they do know.

~~~
bmelton
I can't speak for the parent, but having been in that same boat, I'll answer
for myself.

 _Why limit yourself to <language_x>?_

It isn't about limiting myself to the language as it is being able to hit the
ground running with it. I was mistakenly given an interview where they were
looking for a Ruby developer, and had been referred to them. Only problem was
that I didn't know Ruby as intimately as I do other languages. The position
was fairly high paying, and one assumes an expectation of proficiency that I
wouldn't be able to deliver on.

Could I have learned the language? Sure, almost certainly -- but the question
is really whether or not I can learn the language faster than they can realize
how inefficient I'm being and (rightly) fire me? Even if I'm upfront about it
(which I was), I'm still not willing to gamble unemployment on whether or not
I'll get up to speed within their expectations when I could easily justify my
salary somewhere in a language I'm more familiar with.

Edit: I should also add that since that time, I have spent more time with Ruby
and figured out that I don't really like it. Not going to get into a language
debate or anything, it's a fine language, but it didn't fit the way I
naturally think so, had I taken that job and learned quickly and all that, I'd
have found myself programming in a language that I didn't really love, which
could have lead to less job satisfaction as well.

------
zobzu
I left an interview early too, with Google in fact. I told them I obviously
did not fit in their culture at least for that very position (SRE) , as we had
divergent views, and that I wanted to abort the interview process. No need for
them or I to lose time if I was going to refuse anyway.

The guy (technical person) was shocked, as if this was impossible. He also
insisted more than 5 times to continue with the process, which, I refused.

Later on, they contacted me, telling me that they marked me as "failed
interview process" (ie: do not hire in the future).

That told only one thing, that indeed, I wasn't a fit for that culture -
probably at any position then.

~~~
hcarvalhoalves
Google sees itself as the only tech company in the world, that people who
wanna work there desperately want so and have nothing else to do in life.

That's the vision I have after looking at their hiring process.

~~~
notimetorelax
Funny thing I even believed in it. After having failed the last interview I
looked around and realized that there are many companies that do things that I
consider more interesting than what Google does.

------
aroberge
Professionalism cuts both ways. Any company employee that reacts negatively in
ways similar to what is described here (when the interviewee announced he was
leaving) would display what I consider to be extremely unprofessional
behaviour. The fact that this reaction seemed to have been shared by a number
of employees is perhaps a symptom of groupthink. The best feedback ever I got
when we were in the process of hiring was from one of my very laid back
employee, who is often dismissed as "unimportant" and has a way to put people
at ease, and who got some unique insight into what a prospective employee
would be like.

I see this type of interview a typical "alpha male hehaviour competition"
where existing employees are trying to assert in advance their worth to a
potential future colleague (to put it nicely).

------
droithomme
Assuming the accounting is correct, I think the guy was OK to end the
interview politely (without throwing a fit or making grand statements) and
leave.

It was also not surprising they were shocked and upset, but that in itself
doesn't mean he should have refrained from ending the interview, or that he
was unprofessional.

I have thought of walking out myself, I think most have.

For example one interview the manager presented a long monologue about how
stupid he felt people from a certain well known outsourcing country were. It
wasn't even so much that he was racist, it was that that his stories showed he
was closed minded, judgmental and reactionary. I doubt these personality
factors were limited to his opinions about national origin. I continued the
interview and declined the subsequent offer, citing another better offer. The
other offer was for less money but was a project I wanted to work on more, the
diatribe wasn't really relevant and only would have been if the offers were
similar or his was for more interesting work. I chose not to give him feedback
about his rants because I wanted him to keep doing it so other candidates
would have the same warning. Him not saying what he really thinks certainly
isn't going to change his actual personality.

In other cases I see the interview to the end out of curiosity and to have a
good story to tell, but also because you never really know what is going to
happen without seeing it all the way through. I may find out more about their
business, I may make some contacts talking to people there. Or maybe it is a
wash out, but having flown across the country I am going to make it to the end
of the day's interviews.

------
VLM
I walked out of an interview, furious, probably two decades ago at "major
cellphone company". HR advertised for an RF engineer position, which I had the
education and experience for. I can totally sympathize with being rude because
I'm normally very calm and I was Barely, just barely able to keep under
control. So I burned 10% of my annual vacation days to come here, and drove
half way across the state for hours to be bait and switched into a 1st level
high school dropout call center support job at about a fifth my current pay?
I'm thinking are you F-ing kidding me? I just barely kept it civil and made
sure they understood perfectly why I was walking out of the interview. I saw
in the bathroom mirror on the way out that I was blazing red in the face so I
must have been quite the sight. The HR woman who screwed up the job req and ad
and phone interview was more embarrassed than I was, and I actually got along
excellently with the technician dept team lead, because we were basically at
the same level at different companies (I wasn't mad at the individuals, solely
at the situation).

What HR meant by RF engineer was by RF they wanted a call center guy to handle
dropped call issues and by engineer they wanted to never pay overtime. Um,
sorry HR lady, thats not really what I went to school for, nor is it anything
like what I was doing at that time for about five times the annual salary,
admittedly with a very similar job title.

~~~
rada
Technical jobs present a unique opportunity for HR to screw up. Once, HR sent
us a candidate for a data warehousing job because the guy used to work at a
warehouse.

------
heliodor
What I find interesting here is the contrast in expected behavior for a
company and for an interviewee. Most companies won't tell you why they're
rejecting you if you interview with them. Most of them won't even send you a
rejection email! Yet most people commenting on SE point out that you should
explain why you're cutting the interview short and leaving.

~~~
racbart
If you want to compare, then imagine that you're in the middle of the
interview and the interviewer suddenly tells you “get lost, here's the
elevator”.

Saying “thanks but no, thanks” after the interview without telling the reason
if perfectly fine for both a company and an interviewee.

~~~
eropple
_If you want to compare, then imagine that you're in the middle of the
interview and the interviewer suddenly tells you “get lost, here's the
elevator”._

This happens. The reverse isn't unreasonable either.

~~~
rdl
A _lot_ of companies schedule interviews with a natural break in the process
partway through -- basically you do phone screens, with people not progressing
beyond those, and the in-person interview can be split to morning, lunch,
after-lunch; senior people (or larger groups, or people with more constrained
schedules, ...) meet with candidates after lunch, and if someone is a no-hire
based on the morning, the candidate doesn't know about the afternoon phase and
is told he can go home before or after lunch.

Personally I think it's important to sell no-hire candidates on the company,
since even no-hires might be hires in the future (for different roles, or if
they add skills), or might be referrers of other, better candidates, or might
end up working for a vendor or customer, or just might make negative social
media postings about you which dissuade other candidates. So doing morning
interviews, lunch (which turns into "selling the company's mission to the
candidate", ideally by a senior person who isn't overly busy, not a random HR
drone), etc. for the no-hires.

~~~
eropple
That's basically how my last company did it, and it worked well. I'd say that
your description is how it should be done.

What I was trying to say, probably in too few words, is that many places don't
do it that way and I have little sympathy for them. =)

------
thinker
There seems to be a double standard in the comments here.

Companies regularly cut short interviews (speaking from personal experience).
They've all been polite about it and explain why, usually saying "it's not the
right fit". There are some companies that ask between multiple interviews if
the candidate is still interested in talking to the next person.

A candidate should be allowed the same ability to "walk out". From the OPs
story I got that he cut his interview not during a round but before the next
one was to begin (the reason for moving him into another room). Thats the
perfect time to do it. The reason the candidate gave is sufficient, he doesn't
wish to waste anyone's time. The response of the company in this case is
actually arrogant and unprofessional.

~~~
Mvandenbergh
That is not a double standard, most people here are just making pragmatic
judgements rather than moral ones. Should the power relationship between
employee and employer or between VC and portfolio company be perfectly
symmetrical? Maybe. Is it? Usually not, though of course that depends on
current market conditions.

------
dedward
It's always okay to politey and professionaly not waste people's time. Don't
come across as judgemental, angry, or anything similar or you risk burning
bridges you may not even realize you have.

From the brief description, it sounds like the guy was showing a bit too much
emotion in leaving. Also - just because an interview process seems harsh
doesn't mean the company is harsh - the interview is one thing, the job is
often quite another - results tend to speak for themselves regardless of
culture (and as long as you aren't a snob or jerk to your co-workers) If a
seasoned, experienced professional doesn't get that, maybe they aren't a good
fit...

------
evanprodromou
The problem here isn't the interviewee; it's the interviewer.

This is exactly why we do phone screenings and brief initial interviews. If
something like location, development technique, interior design or dress code
isn't going to work out for someone, you should be able to flush some of that
out in a 15-minute phone screen, and the rest in a 30-60 minute initial
interview.

By the time you're bringing someone in for a full day, the interviewer should
be at well over 75% sure the person is a do-hire. Don't waste your team's time
or effort on someone you're not going to go with (unless you're stress-testing
your interview process...).

As far as walking out: there's _so_ much data here. For the company, they've
either got a dysfunctional interview process or some seriously difficult
fellow developers. Both those problems need to be addressed.

For the interviewee, there's the information on how the team responds. If
there's a problem, and they want to solve it, they need to be more pro-active
about it. "Can we break now and continue later?" Also, "Can we get a post-
mortem from you?" At the very least, it's a good time to break for coffee or
beers around the corner.

------
m0nty
> He could feel sudden hostility from everybody in the room at the time.

Sounds like he made a good call here. With a professional interviewer, the
worst you might get is "perhaps you could help us by explaining why you feel
that way?" Who would seriously want to bully someone into staying to be
interviewed for a job they didn't feel they could do? Personally I would thank
him for his honesty.

~~~
Jabbles
Is it usual to have a team of people interview someone, rather than a lot of
one-on-one or two-on-one sessions? This reduces the number of developer-hours
used in interviewing. I don't think that adding a 3rd or more interviewer will
add anything, and it can be intimidating for candidates, adding noise to your
search for a suitable one.

~~~
dripton
In a couple of decades of occasional job interviews, I've done mostly 1:1 and
a handful of 2:1.

I've only done one 4:1, which was actually lunch in between all-day 1:1
interviews, and which didn't feature any technical questions just random
social conversation. It was definitely still part of the interview, though.

------
ams6110
You'd only need to do this in the scenario of an all day (or longer)
interview, which in itself is something you should not enter into without some
pretty good feelings developed from the preliminary/phone interview.

In this case it sounds like a fairly conventional "business" type guy didn't
like the idea of working in a open environment with a bunch of kids wearing
jeans. But that kind of basic "what's your work environment like" information
should have been known or ascertained by him before accepting an invite for an
all-day on-site interview.

In rare cases you may realize during the final screening that there's some
fundamental incompatibilty, but if you do your due diligence in the
preliminaries this really shouldn't happen.

Having to walk out of a final interview means that both sides executed the
initial screening poorly.

Edit: typos

~~~
Retric
I am a programmer with 10+ years exp who wares a tie every day to work.
Reading though that though I see a lot of red flags that have nothing to do
with the dress code. Honestly, using a custom ORM solution is a sign of
incompetence. Frameworks seem easy and fun to people that don't understand
them, but after a few years I think about such things a series of trade-offs
not an interesting problem.

A few moths ago a coworker with ~5 years exp wanted to write their own simple
graphing library to get around a few problems, everyone in the office said
have fun do it on your own time, but don't add it to the code base. He had fun
and it was a great learning experience, but the idea of working where most
people where at that point has little appeal.

PS: 15 years ago there where a lot of great reasons to write your own
framework, now days not so much.

------
lawdawg
People seem to think its fine to walk out of an interview early ... but how do
they feel if the interviewer ends the interview early, or your "full day" of
interviews is cut to just 1 or 2 hours because they just didn't think it was a
good fit?

I'm guessing some of you would be pissed because you took the whole day off
for the interview only to be kicked out early.

On the other hand, if I was on an interview loop, and the person left before
it was my turn, I'd be grateful ... now I have extra time to do meaningful
work.

~~~
king_jester
> People seem to think its fine to walk out of an interview early ... but how
> do they feel if the interviewer ends the interview early, or your "full day"
> of interviews is cut to just 1 or 2 hours because they just didn't think it
> was a good fit?

Uh this happens a lot. In fact, when I was looking for my first entry level
job in a new city this was semi-common. Many interviewers or hiring managers
will get hostile at you for the smallest things, like failing to get the catch
in a puzzle question or because they dislike something about your resume. As
soon as that one person would leave the room, it was usually followed by
someone from HR coming back and politely telling me the interview was over. As
a worker you owe a potential employer nothing and have the right to leave at
any time you wish, regardless of how intimidating some people will be when you
say you want out.

------
spaghetti
It's 100% fine to end the interview early as the OP did. The interviewers/hr
will end the interview early the moment they're sure it won't work out.

The fact that the interviewers acted rudely is a great sign that it's an awful
place to work. Would be nice if the company were named so others can avoid
interviewing there.

------
psykotic
Companies with all-day interview affairs have no qualms about cutting the
process short at lunch time. Why should an interviewee not be able to do the
same? It must be handled delicately and gracefully, but that hopefully goes
without saying.

------
richardjordan
An interview shouldn't be a position of superiors grilling an inferior. If you
find yourself in that kind of interview you're unlikely to be finding a great
working environment.

From that I'd suggest an interview should be a meeting of equals - they want
the right person, you want the right company, both sides have an interest in
figuring this out. Companies have no hesitation cutting short a day long
interview process if by mid-morning the feedback to HR is that this is going
to be a no-hire. Nor should candidates feel bad about cutting short an
interview if it's clear early it'll be a no-accept to any prospective offer.

Honesty helps all parties. Analogy by anecdote:

I have always felt that an interview is a fair dialogue. Back in 1997 (yes I
am THAT old) I was interviewed for a tech support position near London, for a
massive multinational which had a completely failing tech service desk
catering to tens of thousands of desktops. At the end of the interview the
interviewer - who'd be my prospective boss - asked the question "does that
sound like something that appeals to you" after describing the job.

My answer was honest: "no not really, but I wish you all the best in the
search."

"Why not?"

"Well, I might have interest in leading a team like that because it sounds
like there's a real problem to be solved in servicing your internal customers,
but it doesn't sound like it's a process I'd enjoy working in, as it is".

This being London in the late 90s where there was a massive IT shortage (a bit
like Silicon Valley and engineers today) I got a call back from my agent
(fancy name for recruiter) who asked what I'd done. Apparently they'd called
him back and offered me the job of running the Service Desk and fixing the
problems that made me not interested in working on it.

I ended up with a much higher paying job offer, my first management experience
(eventually building the team to over 40 people from the 6 I started with) and
they ended up with someone who finally solved their problems, turning first
line fix around from 17% to 70% in about six months.

Interviews aren't there for you to say yessir nosir. They're a back and forth
between equals trying to find the best for both parties. This guy is
absolutely right to call it a day early, if he feels it's not the right fit.

------
incision
A a good friend of mine interviewed with one of the current powerhouses of
technology when they weren't quite so big.

After successfully navigating a few rounds of technical interviewing they gave
him one of those famous brain teaser type questions. He responded by asking
the interviewer to explain how the question would be relevant to his work with
the company.

The interviewer immediately explained that he clearly "wasn't a good fit" and
ended the interview.

I tend to feel they were both "right".

------
yason
Everybody's talking about burning bridges but it's a bad analogy. Bridges like
these won't always catch fire even if torched and then again some burst into
flames even if you didn't even touch your matches. The guy in the question
seems to have just walked on the bridge.

Sounds like the guy just spoke directly. Some people can't take that; I don't
know how much more neutrally you can give the message "I'm done with the
interview" than saying pretty much just that. If you want to sugarcoat it then
doing so still won't change the message: it just makes it a slightly more
difficult for others to express how badly they take it.

I don't know the exact words used in the situation but he seemed polite yet
firm. I would expect such language from anyone who's used to not waste
people's time, including his own. While he doesn't want to be rude, he also
can't control what can be considered rude by others.

There's no question whether such behaviour is allowed: of course the guy can
just go and decide to abort the day. Nobody lost anything there: no money, no
time. If he has seen life at all, he must have already learned that no matter
what you do you will piss off somebody anyway so it's best to not anticipate
too much what others will think of you.

~~~
forensic
The take away here is that you should always lie or people will get pissed.
The truth is "fuck you guys" but the best answer is, "excuse me" followed by
"something came up I have to leave" followed by later saying "thanks for
theopportunity, but I'm no longer available"

^ now that is smooth. No burnt bridges, still let's you eject.

------
andrew_wc_brown
I have walked out on meetings, presentations, interviews and etc. I'm even
audacious enough to tell the referral up front that if its a waste of time I'm
walking out so be sure that its not.

Half the time, the reaction is that I've lost 'face'. The other half of the
time, I'm praised for my efficiency or speaking up.

You broadcast what you what want. If you want to work with no-nonsense cuts
through the bull and tackles real problems directly people, than keep doing
what your doing.

------
damoncali
It's not the cultural norm, so if you ditch an interview, you had best go out
of your way to be _extremely_ polite about it. You might be better off just
slogging it out to avoid burning bridges.

------
alecco
Tech companies should learn to respect people. It's not OK to take that kind
of interviewing behavior as a rite of passage.

------
don_draper
If I spend more than 50% of the time in an interview solving puzzles I'm not
working for you. I may suck as a programmer, but if that's what you do in an
interview, you suck at interviewing people.

~~~
danielweber
If I don't spend enough time in an interview doing puzzles, I'm not working
for you.

~~~
sabat
Puzzles in interviews are worthless unless the potential job involves doing
those same kind of puzzles. If you want to see how someone's mind works, you
could, say, talk through solving a real-world problem as if you were pair-
programming. But don't use puzzles are brain-teasers. They don't tell you
anything practical.

~~~
danielweber
If the puzzles are "why are manhole covers round?" I agree.

If the puzzles are "given a list of N integers, positive and negative, find
the consecutive subset with the most negative sum" then I want to see how they
come up with an answer.

------
therandomguy
During a break go to the font desk and tell the receptionist, "I'm here today
for an interview today, can I please ask to see someone from HR". Wait for the
HR rep. "Hey, I spoke with the first couple interviewers and it seems like it
won't be a good fit. I would hate to take the next interviewer's time". They
will understand and everyone will be happy at the end.

------
johngalt
I've been on the other side of this. An interviewee had a killer competing
offer that I couldn't match. He was so apologetic, as if he was worried he'd
insulted me. I had to assure him that I took no offense and wished him well.
Don't know why anyone would take something like this personally.

~~~
beersigns
I've been that interviewee before and I was much the same. For me I realized
it has to do with viewing the time spent in the interview as some kind of
unspoken contract. You both felt good about the interview but you aren't
accepting. Feels like you're letting them down.

------
Kliment
This is a duplicate of <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4448409>

------
nicholassmith
I think I'd have done the same, he sounds like he did it pretty politely
rather than just getting up and doing a runner. An all day interview where
you've decided half way in it just won't work is not just a waste of your
time, but a waste of a companies.

However, the way the room reacted doesn't surprise me. Companies like to
create loyalty which can occasionally turn a bit wolf-pack. Still, a shake of
the hand and a 'thanks for coming, sorry it didn't work' is _always_ classy
and _always_ a good idea.

------
stephengillie
Other discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4448409>

------
lwhi
1) When a natural break occurs, ask to speak to one of the members of the
interview team privately.

2) Explain your concerns and be prepared to listen.

3) If you still want to leave, thank them, and leave.

~~~
mturmon
Good answer. One thing overlooked in this discussion is that, if things went
this far bad (scene in conference room and embarrassing elevator conversation)
then something went wrong. This implies there's room for improvement in the
way the interviewee handled the situation.

------
racbart
The fact that you leave early is not rude, but the way you do it might be. He
should find the lead developer (or whoever was in the lead of interviewing
him) and tell him that he feels he won't fit into the culture, thank him for
the interview and then leave.

Leaving without a word is in fact rude (“I'm done, show me the elevator”
doesn't count, especially if lead developer had to jump the elevator to ask
what's wrong and why he's leaving).

------
mdesq
Interviews are complex, but I view part of the process as negotiation. One of
the principles of being an effective negotiator is knowing what you desire to
be the future relationship between the parties. Typically in the technology
space, I don't like burning any bridges.

Thus, I start the interview process out by saying that I value and appreciate
directness and honesty in all of my dealings. In keeping with that, if at any
time I feel I have enough information to know that this will not be a good
fit, that I will be honest about that and we can part on good terms and not
waste each other's time. I also ask in return that they be up-front and honest
with me (don't bring me in for interview after interview just as a charade
when they know they're giving the job to Fred anyway).

I've used this tactic a handful of times and it has never failed to get a
positive response. On a negotiation level, it may also give me a slight edge
because I broached the topic first and raised the possibility of not seeing
the process through to the end, something many interviewers forget is a
possibility.

------
desireco42
I see a lot of comments about how you shouldn't burn bridges. I agree, I still
think this was right thing to do. I would excuse myself politely and walk out
as well.

Maybe person should ask to talk to lead dev or whoever, explain him that he
doesn't believe he would fit, thank him for opportunity and leave. In other
words say, it's not you, it's me ;) and still leave and enjoy rest of the day.

I generally don't believe in daylong interviews, I don't see the point in
multiple rounds, everyone on the team talking to you endlessly. It is a waste
of everyone's time and energy, to me personally it shows how people are
uncertain in their decisions and need support.

One more thing, this is opportunity for company to leave a good impression on
you as well as you to them, them being disorganized (often the case) doesn't
really help much.

------
VikingCoder
There are companies who do the same: schedule a whole-day interview, and then
escort you from the building part-way through, with no explanation.

Is it rude? Yes.

------
geebee
I'm sympathetic to the guy who walked out of the inteview, though I'm not sure
it was a good idea.

A lot of this probably has to do with your experience. I once had an interview
for a position that was right up my alley. I have an MS in Industrial
Engineering and I've worked at large manufacturing companies as a developer,
as well as smaller startups that create optimization software for
manufacturing, shipping, and production systems.

I went to an interview for a company almost precisely in this business area.
They asked me to code a singleton, traverse a binary tree, then do it without
recursion, add a leaf to a binary tree, prove that the dual of the primal is
the primal of the dual, prove various long term outcomes from markov chains,
swap two integers without creating a third integer, write various outer joins,
convert a sql table to a binary set of indicators (is this a common thing?),
and print all possible permutation of string using recursion.

At no point did anyone ask about, or even show the vaguest interest, in my
background or experience. It wasn't super well coordinated, they pretty much
just kept moving me from one developer to the other - so of course I was much
more exhausted and drained than perhaps my interviewer of the hour realized.

My interviewers were younger, and generally looked fresh out of their CS
degrees, so I'd guess that they were quite a bit sharper where it came to
markov chains, hessian matrices, and b-trees. I didn't look like I was
clueless, but I came off as rusty, and I did stumble with things that I would
have done much more easily with an hour hitting my old text books.

It was eye-opening, and frustrating. I was polite and stuck with it, and I
kept trying, because I actually wanted the job, and I thought that they could
use someone like me, because while they were very talented, my few questions
to them suggested that there were areas where I could bring some experience
that they didn't have in house.

I didn't get an offer, but I am glad I stuck through it. The one thing I wish
I'd done is _politely_ explain to the hiring manager what I just wrote here -
that I think their hiring process might be filtering out an area of talent
that could be valuable to the company.

Actually, that's probably the advice I'd give the dude who terminated the
interview. Rather than ending it abruptly, ask the hiring manager if he'd be
willing to confer for 15 minutes or so. Explain why you think it's going
badly, and what your concerns are. If you disagree, that's fine - then you can
end it on better terms without appearing to leave in a huff.

And while this is off topic, I would like to point out one more thing - this
is the sort of experience that often comes to my mind when I hear about
companies complaining about a lack of available talent, and it's one of the
reasons I'm skeptical (though this interview was years ago, when hiring wasn't
on fire the way it is now).

~~~
peacemaker
From my experience the hiring process hasn't changed much, at least not in the
US. I recently changed jobs so went through several interviews and most were
as you described - a series of technical questions with zero interest in my
background or personality.

I could understand this approach for more junior guys straight out of college,
but when hiring senior developers I'd assume the company would want to know a
bit more about the candidates soft skills, past challenges and so on.

It actually put me off continuing the process with two of the companies
(though I didn't walk out of the interview!) because it made me feel like all
they wanted was a 'coding robot' and couldn't care less about the person
behind the computer monitor.

------
hcarvalhoalves
A day long interview is a good signal the company is full of bull already.

What's wrong with meeting the guy, talking to him and then inviting to work
one day at the company? Just give him some tasks, see how he manages it. If it
doesn't work out, you got 8 man-hours for free.

They wanna judge people based on how they dress, what they do on their free
time, etc. Not everyone is on their 20's, or wanna be a geek all day. Some
software companies act like model agencies thinking they are the coolest the
place in the world. It's embarrassing.

~~~
uptown
"If it doesn't work out, you had 8 man-hours for free."

Setting aside the legal, ethical, and tax implications of such a proposal, why
should a talented developer be expected to donate a day of unpaid labor?

~~~
hcarvalhoalves
They were going to waste his whole day with corporate ego trip already. Why
not make some productive use of his time then? At least if it doesn't work
out, the candidate got some experience, learned how they work on the company,
etc.

------
azat_co
Could you point what was his expectation culture wise and the company's
situation? What exactly he didn't like except the wrong questions?

I wish I left some interviews early :)

In the end it's important to leave on a good impression for future connections
but probably those people (in your friends company) were arrogant immature
kids in the first place and they don't care about good future connections
anyways. In this case don't waste your time. Same for the interviewers -
please let the people know early on and save their time instead of being
"polite" and dragging them into meetings multiple people (usually with the
same dumb questions) or even stretching interview process into multiple days!

------
jamiemill
I think it's a rather silly question.

When you receive an invitation to dinner, is it polite to save your host money
by leaving before dessert? No. By default it will be rude and it would be up
to you to find a nice way to do so.

Likewise I feel if an interview is scheduled for all day and you accept the
invitation, then it's up to you to apologise if you want to leave early. So
long as you explain that you don't want to waste their time, then no one
should be narkey about it. But if you make it sound like you don't want to
waste _your_ time, then I think they have a right to be a little miffed at
you.

------
arasmussen
Think about it from both sides of the coin. An interviewer will never say out
loud "You just failed that question, we're no longer interested in
interviewing", even though failing one question could definitely break you.

I think interviewers purposefully don't tell you how you've done in your
interviews because it avoids any bad feelings/burnt bridges, and having to
explain why they've done poorly. IMO this goes both ways, if you walk out of
an interview, you better be okay with burning that bridge and explaining to a
heated person on the spot why you're walking out.

~~~
sabat
An interviewer may not _say_ you've failed, but it's common practice to cut an
interview short when an interviewer believes the candidate is not up to snuff.
I've been at more than one company where any interviewer is allowed to "cut
him loose" when a candidate is obviously unqualified.

Why would it be different the other way around? The key is, of course, being
polite and graceful about it. But I don't buy the argument that this is
burning a bridge. There are plenty of fish in the sea, and it's unlikely that
cutting an interview short is actually going to cause you problems in the
future.

------
petdance
I suggest that one's time isn't so valuable that you can't spend half an hour
of unnecessary discussion. (In the case of the OP, I see that we're talking
about more time than that.)

You never know who you will meet again in your future, or who your interviewer
knows that you will meet in your future. It's a small world.

You want to be well-remembered. Walking out goes against that goal. Anything
short of direct hostility, I suggest sucking it up and going through it to the
end.

------
bromley
It sounds like he may have made his exit in front of the other candidates. I
can see the company being frustrated by that as it would naturally be likely
to make the other candidates view their potential new employer less favorably.

If he was certain that leaving early was the right thing to do, it would have
been better to choose a moment when he could tell one of the interviewers
quietly, and exit without causing a noticeable scene.

------
gavinlynch
> "He was criticized as being wrong for not following very dogmatic principles
> to the letter of the law."

What does this even mean?? He didn't respond correctly with their secret
handshake? He didn't drink his cup of coffee with exactly 2 creams?

Is this a social thing, or a programmer thing? Did he use an unconventional
coding style?

This line really sticks in my craw, confuses and somehow bothers me... I would
love an extrapolation.

------
slewis
This question is totally loaded. Whether they like you or you like them (which
is what the first half of the description discusses) is irrelevant.

The question could be evaluated more objectively if it were just left to the
headline: "Is it rude to leave an interview early if you have already made
your decision?". The answer is no, of course not, as long as you're don't do
it rudely.

------
lugia
It's very rude if you just leave without fully explaining to people why you
want to walk out. Even if you guys are indeed unfit to each other, the
interviewers will still feel bad wondering what they did wrong. We are all
human, we all want to improve ourselves, so make sure you both have an
understanding instead of not giving them any chance like that.

------
Create
There are cases, when I can imagine walking out: when the candidate is already
decided upon, but there is a need for legal-theatre, and you wind up being a
decoy candidate in a mock candidate selection process. It happens quite often
actually.

The moment you understand your situation, it is fair game to treat them in
equal manner.

------
motoford
I think I would have raised all of my concerns during the interview, instead
of on my way out. Nothing wrong with not fitting in, but maybe the interview
drill was just that, a drill.

The fact that someone followed him to ask questions tells me company seemed
interested in him despite his opinion of how the interview was going.

------
ForrestN
This might be overly simple, but it seems like the root of the problem on both
sides is just the scheduling of a day-long interview at a place that's so
obviously a bad fit for the candidate.

It would be better for all involved to have a more casual meet-and-greet, tour
of the office, initial conversation beforehand.

------
richardz_work
If one side can end interview half way, the other side can too. Don't see any
problem of that.

------
jakejake
This is the kind of thing that gives programmers a bad name of being anti-
social buffoons. In a programmer's mind they're simply being logical or
efficient. Just because it's logical doesn't make it sensible.

This could be handled much better by somebody with even a shred of social
skills. If he didn't think it was a good fit he could have requested to talk
to the lead or hiring manager and expressed his concerns. They may mutually
agree to end the interview. Perhaps if the company really wanted this guy they
would start figuring out ways to possibly make it work. Or they may have ended
with a handshake and parted ways on good terms. Just declaring "I'm done" like
this brainiac and asking for the door shows that, though he may be a smart
programmer, he has zero social skills.

------
jesskah
Time is valuable. Why waste everyone's time if you know it's not going to
work? I think the key is to do it respectfully and explain why. It's actually
helpful for the company to hear the reasons.

------
onedev
I'm guessing Facebook

~~~
rdl
Facebook has plenty of people >30, which was one of his criticisms of the job.
It's probably mainly late-20s early-30s at this point, unless you're in a non-
technical group like user operations.

------
brown9-2
Gracefully leaving earlier saves time for the interviewee and the
interviewers.

What exactly is the upside of staying longer in this case?

------
mkhalil
For some reason, I imagine Walter White leaving this so called interview. No
clue why. lol

------
scotty79
Just look at your phone. Tell them you have personal emergency and you'll have
to reschedule the rest of interview. Say goodbye, leave, never call. If they
call tell them you accepted another position. That's what interviewers do and
that's what they consider polite.

------
dsolomon
Walking out isn't rude. It's a reality check for the HR and management that
something isn't kosher.

I've walked out of interviews after finding the usual bait-n-switch techniques
regarding position description, expectations, travel requirements,
compensation, work conditions, .. just to name a few.

Do I expect HR/management to get a clue - not really, it's not my job to
further their problem solving ability.

