
Ask HN: How to deal with inexperienced interviewers? - aecs99
Some interviewers are great - they are patient, let you talk, are genuinely curious about your previous work, and ask questions such that the interview is meaningful for both parties.<p>On the other hand, I frequently come across some inexperienced interviewers (often young, or early in their career). They interrupt you before you finish, ask obscure questions, and try to assert that your professional experience and knowledge is somehow inferior to theirs (or at least make you feel that way).<p>I feel excited about challenging questions&#x2F;interviews but sessions with such folks (over the phone, or in person) are always disappointing, and negatively impact the interview outcome. I was wondering if there are any tips on how to handle such interviewers.
======
git-pull
I am at my wits end. I am getting exhausted and drained in these interviews.

There are times where I just botch interviews. Here and there, I look back and
realize I came off the wrong way, like wow, I did that. But I reflect, and
strive to get better. Sometimes it's just not a fit. Or someone comes along
that's a better option than me.

But there is a growing pocket of places I interview at where they blatantly
lie, bait and switch, ignore my portfolio and go right into brainteasers, code
golf, and refactors that have absolutely nothing to do with the role being
filled. Then radio silence.

I'm coming to the conclusion I'd rather earn less and work more hours on my
own than enable this system. Because I have an indictment far more damning the
OP: Some of the people interviewing me can barely code and are trying to
survive another day. Not to mention, there are some who are afraid of letting
in a stronger candidate that could replace them. Heh, what do you think they
do?

Last interview I had, I discussed multiple times it being in Django and
Python. Come the time of our call, interviewer flipped the script, it's in
JavaScript, Underscore, and the data being passed around is so ambiguous it
meshed together in my mind through the remainder of our call. I don't know if
it's a clueless interviewer - or a really shrewd one who knew how to lay one
over me.

Or is it me? The problem I face is getting beat down by all these tests makes
me feel I'm not a good coder. Due to the fog of Dunning-Kruger, I know I can
never be sure if the deficit is really on my end or not.

Does anyone else out there feel this?

I have published code all over. I code 10+ hours a day, even on the weekends.
I get hammered in technical interviews.

~~~
MarkCole
Sometimes in an interview its better to just say "This is not the right job
for me" and end it yourself. I've done that a few times now for various
reasons. Sometimes simply just because I know I probably wouldn't like to have
the interviewer as a Colleague or Boss.

If I thought I was interviewing for a Django/Python job and they completely
changed the job description on me I'd have probably cut it right there. You
can't just completely change the job someone is interviewing for from under
them.

I definitely feel you on it though, I'd much rather earn less in a comfortable
job where I'm happy than go through the stress of interviewing and having to
refresh my knowledge of CS trivia so interviewers can throw a few at me.

~~~
akerro
>they completely changed the job description

>the stress of interviewing and having to refresh my knowledge of CS trivia

I was recently visiting a friend from uni, he wanted to start working in a
bigger company, so he took his chances on Amazon (they had office 10min walk
from where he lived). He applied for Java/C++ backend role with some
indication that's related to robotics.

First week interviewer told him to refresh knowledge from basics of machine
learning, searching algorithms and path finding, so he spent all weekend
reading wikipedia and our notes from uni. During the interview he was asked
questions about his experience with JS, Angular and CSS. What interesting JS
projects he did and why links to the projects are not in his CV.

He graduated with second best grade at the uni with a major project from
autonomous sailing robot and failed interview in Amazon because he didn't do
anything hipsterish with Angular on Github. I showed him link to the FACE of
Amazon to cheer him up... and it worked, he decided not to apply there any
more. What a waste of time.

~~~
Beltiras
For the interested, this is the page referred to:
[https://sites.google.com/site/thefaceofamazon/](https://sites.google.com/site/thefaceofamazon/)

------
vsc
Some five years ago, I was having a phone interview for a company that were
looking for people specializing in embedded programming with solid knowledge
of OS internals and assembly. It seemed a great fit for me as that was what I
have been doing since the start of my professional career.

As soon as the phone call started, the interviewer asked a puzzle question
which had absolutely nothing to do with what I would eventually have to do if
I got the offer. Bemused, I promptly solved the puzzle. He went on to ask
three more puzzles after that. I solved each one of them. Now, it had already
been 20 minutes into the interview and not one relevent question had been
asked. I was getting a bit edgy.

He then went on to ask me textbook questions like difference between a process
and a thread, types of memory management and so on.

It was one hour into the interview and he hadn't asked meaningful question
that could justify the lofty requirements they had mentioned of their
desirable candidate in the Job description.

When after around 1 hour, he asked me another puzzle, I politely asked him the
relevence of that question with respect to the job. He told me that since he
was the one interviewing me, he got to decide what was relevent and what was
not.

I told him that I would like to end the interview right there. He protested. I
hung up.

~~~
TeeWEE
I think this interviewer was not that bad actually. He checked your problem
solving skills, and he ensured you knows some textbook basics. That's fine.
Thats what we do too: In the first interview ensure the candidate satifies the
minimum requirements, and is a problem solver.

~~~
Piskvorrr
I think that the scope of the interview should have been more explicit in such
a case - up front, ideally: "this is a first-level interview, I expect it to
take an hour and a half; if you're successful, we will get to the specifics in
the next one." Without an introduction, an hour of general quizzes would seem
excessive to me.

OTOH, if the recruiter reacted to this expectations mismatch with an
equivalent of "no explanations are given", I would have bailed, too: the
interview is a two-way street, and both sides are interviewing - "do I want to
work in such a company culture as evidenced by the recruiter"?

------
kaikai
Interviews aren't only for the company to get a feel for you- it's also your
chance to get a feel for the company. Would you want to work with someone who
talked over you? How about someone more interested in boosting their own ego
than doing their job (interviewing you)?

If the company thinks this is the person best qualified to judge applicants,
you're dodging a bullet.

~~~
chipperyman573
_If the company thinks this is the person best qualified to judge applicants,
you 're dodging a bullet._

There are so many reasons this is a bad way of thinking.

\- A sample size of one is never enough. This alone is enough of a reason.

\- The interviewer could have normally been a great person but been having a
rough day (maybe some personal stuff or a huge deadline coming up - every
company has those every once in a while, you might have just got them at a bad
time)

\- The original interviewer had to cancel last-minute (call from the
hospital/school, car crash, etc) and the company decided that it would be more
professional to put you with someone with less experience than cancel thirty
minutes before your interview (which could be good or bad depending on how you
see it)

I'm not saying that you're completly wrong - it's definitely an indicator that
the company _may_ not be one you want to work for. But you shouldn't rule out
a company because of one bad interview.

~~~
logicuce
I guess the onus is on the company to fix these things rather than on
interviewer.

Let's say the candidate behaved in this way, should the company ignore it?

~~~
chipperyman573
The company probably won't ignore it, but they also might have missed out on
hiring the best candidate for the position. Just like how you may miss out on
the best career move.

------
1123581321
Make friends. If they're inexperienced, it's your opportunity to manage the
interview and establish a rapport that an experienced interviewer might not
allow, or might discount. Someone who belittles like that is afraid to
encounter someone who "really" knows their stuff and the right words can lead
to their imitating you instead of intimidating you.

~~~
JshWright
Why would a more experienced interviewer not allow or discount a good rapport?
I've spent my fair share of time on both sides of the interviewing table (or
screen, in most cases), and have always sought to spend the first ~20% of the
interview building rapport.

I think the candidate's ability to communicate about non-technical matters is
important, and if you can put someone at ease, you're likely to get a more
realistic view of their abilities.

------
endymi0n
Here's the secret: Don't apply for those jobs and cut your losses short by
finishing the interview yourself and walking out.

TL;DR: Bad interviews are a strong, pretty reliable symptom of a lack of good
company culture.

What few people understand is that interviews aren't just for the employer,
they are also your chance to choose who you're working for, what you get to
know and how to progress your career. Your colleagues are the people who you
will regularly spend more time awake with than your spouse.

They say "you don't leave a company, you leave a boss" — and it's true.
Interviews are exactly the other side of this coin: You will usually sit
across the table of your future boss. So choose well, as your choice will have
a profound impact on your wellbeing for next few years, impacting work-life
balance, chances and hirability afterwards.

Don't screw it up and just politely leave as soon as possible.

------
muzani
Normally, I also reject companies that have bad interviewers - it means that
the rest of the people they actually hire are likely below average as well.
Which also means poor growth, poor salary growth for you, and likelihood that
you'll have to lift some of your colleagues' weight as well.

Sometimes it's just the recruiting dept that's bad. I've interviewed with one
company, where the recruiters were quite incompetent and insecure. Forms were
extremely long, including personal things like t-shirt size and education
level of siblings.

But the company was quite good. It was just a side effect of a rapidly growing
company not hiring the right people for those slots. People who filled in
those forms just treated it as another hurdle and the tech team still remains
awesome.

~~~
johnpython
Wait, they honestly asked you about the education level of your siblings? This
is the most SVesque thing I've heard all year.

~~~
muzani
One of many questions. It was more like spouse, children, parents, siblings
and then a table of age, job, education level. They made it look something
like it's asking for emergency contacts.

I'm sure they asked pregnancy status too. Also I've heard some forms will even
ask your spouse's race and religion.

Very personal questions are normal where I live, but there's no law that says
I have to answer them.

------
skmvasu
I had the exact same problem with an interviewer recently. He came in with a
preconceived notion to reject and kept moving the conversation towards that.

He was interviewing me for a Sr. Engg role , and his first question was what
is the difference between Server side and Client side scripting. I took it in
good humor and answered him. He stunned me by saying "That's not what I was
looking for. You should have just said server side scripting runs on the
server and client side runs on the client" :P

I know I should have hung up there, but I was referred by a friend so had to
sit through the entire hour.

~~~
MightySCollins
Ahh so JavaScript is just Java which runs of the client as well.

------
baldfat
My worst interview ever was the head of HR for a Fortune 500 company that
transferred to the Non-Profit side of the company. The job was working with
non-technical and working with children. My interview was very invasive. I had
two private investigators looking into my past, an interview at home that
included my wife and two children and medical examination and physical test.

I arrived at the final interview and waited 50 minutes. Then the two people
doing the interview never even read anything about me and came into it cold. I
was prepared for a very detailed interview and instead I got ambiguous
questions and when they asked me questions they actually reflected back what
they heard and it was 50% just wrong. I corrected their mistake and the person
gave me attitude. Later in the interview the person read their notes and he
wrote down what was factually inaccurate that I corrected before. I corrected
the inaccurate statement again and he was beyond pissed. I didn't get the job.
When I was called I said to the person who I was in contact with for the whole
9 months that it was the worst interview I have ever had and made me look very
negative at the whole experience. He just acknowledge what i stated and stated
sorry. I still get request to reapply. I still might.....

------
virtuabhi
I think that commentators on this page have got this one completely wrong. It
is important to let inexperienced engineers have a say in the recruitment
process because they are the ones who will be working under you (right when
you join or maybe in 6-12 months)!

Just to give an example, in one of the onsite interviews at a big tech
company, I was interviewed by someone 1-2 years out of his undergrad. He asked
me to solve a puzzle. Though I am not a big fan of puzzles, I answered it to
the best of my ability. Then the conversation turned into what work he is
doing and how he was getting frustrated on not having any meaningful projects.
I gave him some standard career advice - do a side project that will improve
the efficiency of your team (a new build system, test integration, wiki, etc.)
and discussed higher education options. Both of us were happy by the end of
interview. In addition, it also allowed me to catch a breath between the many
back-to-back interviews.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
OK, but if he's junior, he shouldn't be telling you your answers are wrong. If
he does, he's not the kind of person you want under you.

~~~
virtuabhi
Completely disagree. In most of the companies, unless it is a strict
hierarchy, a 'junior' should be able to tell a 'senior' that his approach is
wrong or propose a different solution. Now the 'junior' might be correct or
incorrect, that is why the 'senior' should be a level-headed person so that
he/she can recognize his/her mistake or correct the 'junior' without insulting
him/her.

------
bob_roboto
If a company can't spare the time of a senior team member to talk to you after
some initial vetting they are probably not worth your time. I've been on the
other side quite often and properly interviewing is time intense. Preparation,
conducting and wrap-up can easily be 4 hours. We only assign a senior member
if we think it could be a match and we need to actively persuade the
candidate. So unless you really want a position, if you get an inexperienced
interview partner just cut your losses and move on. Don't think too much about
it and focus on the next one.

Just generally, be bolder with how you select your employer. If they don't
want to know you personally, move on. If they are not interested in what you
did in previous positions, move on. If they are only interested in skills you
built up previously, move on (because they won't want to develop you). Etc...

------
kenhwang
Interviews go both ways. If everyone was unpleasant, then it might be
representative of the culture there and you may have dodged a bullet. If it's
just one round or one person souring the experience, let the recruiter know.
Companies that care about their culture or image will take the feedback to
heart.

------
TeeWEE
I think the best way to handle it is: Sit trough the interview. At good
companies you get to talk to more than 1 person, and a group of persons decide
whether you get hired. If you really want to join the company you are
interviewing with, then just try to get trough this interview, and try to make
the best of out it. The company you are interviewing with also has limited
developers time, and developers need to get an idea of your skill in a short
amount of time. Try to be the nice person. Or try a different company if it
gives you the bad buzz.

------
pfarnsworth
There's nothing you can do. Complain to the recruiter afterwards, if they
bother calling you, but make sure you tell them that the particular
interviewer was not good.

~~~
pksadiq
> Complain to the recruiter afterwards, if they bother calling you, but make
> sure you tell them that the particular interviewer was not good.

That would be a bad idea. The recruiter knows nothing about the OP, and
probably not much about the interviewer. But the recruiter probably will be in
better terms with the interviewer than the OP (or the one who is being
interviewed).

So the end result would be that the OP will be considered not a good candidate
because he/she complains the interviewer because it didn't went well, or at
least, that will be how the recruiter is probably going to assume.

~~~
gaius
_That would be a bad idea. The recruiter knows nothing about the OP, and
probably not much about the interviewer_

A recruiter wants to place candidates and thereby earn commissions. If they
get a stream of candidates they've sent to interview at company X come back
and say "the interviewer was deeply unpleasant and I would never work there"
then they are going to have to react - either by raising it with the company
or by stopping wasting time by sending candidates there in the first place. No
candidates placed == no money.

~~~
jjkk0101
This. Know thy recruiter, they can hand pick your interview loop with better
interviewer.

------
AnimalMuppet
Look somewhere else.

If company X has inexperienced interviewers, then company X almost certainly
has other problems. Inexperienced programmers? Inexperienced managers? Bad
processes? Something, anyway, because a company shouldn't be sending people to
interview who are unfit for the task.

And if you get past those interviewers and get hired, then you're going to
have to live with whatever else was going on that allowed those people to be
the interviewers. So I think you're better off taking those people as being a
datapoint about the company. Walk away, and be grateful you found out early
enough.

------
binaryapparatus
It is made up profession. Of course they have to make it sound and look like
there is any value is HR hiring. Sure younger interviewers don't know all the
tricks yet to make it sound like it all makes sense. More than once I was
talking to a guy (different ones) and when they proudly say they are in
HR/interviewing people I feel genuinely sorry. Bragging to be a parasite and
being proud about the fact. I've been nice in this post in case anybody is
wondering.

~~~
thinking_errol
H != R.

------
taternuts
Unfortunately I don't think there is much to do about it. The strategy I've
adopted the past couple years is to just grin and bear it and get out ASAP.
Even if I get an offer (not usually in these cases, because the interviewer is
dead set on proving you're an idiot and they are smart), I will reject it
(unless I've been through several interviews with other teammates that I
enjoyed).

------
blubb-fish
I guess the answer depends on how strong your desire is to work for that
company and whether you consider the (annoying) interviewer representative for
the place. Who would like to work with a bunch of wise-asses?! and also it
depends on your mental features - like patience and communication skills.

I usually just stay friendly and see what I can do to keep the interview
short.

------
margorczynski
For me an instant turn-off is live coding (I get too stressed) and pointless
academic questions that have nothing to do with the things I would be doing
there.

And to be honest after I experience that combo I usually give up cause that
means most people there were chosen based on that.

~~~
rocco337
Interviewer: Can you explain me linked list structure? Candidate: blah bla
blah .... Interviewer: Great. Can you tell me where linked list structure is
commonly used? Candidate: On job interviews

~~~
srean
Linked list of buffers are pretty useful for ferrying data in and out fast
when you cannot allocate a lot of contiguous memory.

------
juancn
If you have interviewing skills, reverse the interview. Take the reins and
guide them through it.

------
pleasecalllater
Just give up.

My experience is terrible with them. There is a huge chance that they will
sent wrong information about you, and you will have problems with even talking
with the next recruiter from the same company.

------
gavriel
>try to assert that your professional experience and knowledge is somehow
inferior to theirs (or at least make you feel that way).

I had this exact situation happen a while ago. I applied for a front-end
developer role and the interviewer insisted on asking questions about the deep
internals of node. And whenever I gave a satisfactory answer he would
immediately tell me an alternative answer, as if mine isn't somehow good
enough. The entire interview just felt like he had to one up me at all times.

~~~
BillinghamJ
Your comment was dead. Looks like you were shadowbanned due to your previous
comments. I have vouched for this one, as it seems reasonable.

Downvoting this seems strange... it’s pretty standard practice to explain why
you’ve vouched for a dead comment.

------
kapauldo
Wrong audience

