
My favorite interview question - antouank
https://www.nczonline.net/blog/2015/09/my-favorite-interview-question/
======
kazinator
> _Sometimes the scope of this question is too big for people to grasp and
> they get stuck._

The ones who appear stuck could be the reasonably clever ones who know that
the question's purpose is to _reject_ poor-fit candidates. The extra time is
needed to think about how to "game" the question to avoid looking like a poor
fit, not because the question has a large scope. (And that includes avoiding
haplessly looking like a poor fit even when the candidate knows he or she is
actually a good fit, just by fumbling a rejector question.)

Even those who could instantly blurt out a honest answer aren't going to do
that, if they know what is good for them. For instance "On Monday, I start
getting paid $150K per year to work on new widgets for my toy open source GUI
library, that nothing uses other than the demo calculator, text pad and mini
paint program."

All the discussion stimulating questions about what languages you'd like to be
using and such are just pieces of rope to hang yourself with. Especially the
reversal "what would you absolutely not want to do?" You probably don't want
to give a passionate discussion about things you refuse to do.

Suppose the job you're interviewing for is in fact close to ideal. You want to
be doing exactly what they're doing and paid about what they pay. You have the
skills and are in fact a great fit. But, oops, you can't say that, because
it's indistinguishable from the bullshit that someone completely naive would
blurt out.

All this kind of thinking is going to chew up many seconds of time, and create
awkward silences.

~~~
kenko
I completely agree with this.

My ideal job? I get paid a hefty salary (presumably by an eccentric patron or
institution because who else would front it) to read around in the OED,
essays, philosophy, novels, and whatever else catches my fancy, occasionally
writing up responses or pointing out interesting or striking connections. My
remit also includes writing doggerel, shaggy dog stories, and academic papers.
I think I'd be really good at that, and I'd definitely enjoy it, and I could
absolutely start on Monday.

But you know what? I've never, ever interviewed for that job, and I never
will. I'm interviewing for _this_ job, which presumably I know something about
and chose to apply to, even though it's not the ideal. (It's something even
better: it exists.)

~~~
blowski
I actually quite like the question. As somebody who has done some hiring, if
you've got past the CV perusal stage then it means I think you're probably
good enough and I want to hire you. Trouble is, there are 5 candidates and
only 1 position.

So I have to come up with a way to kick your tyres, and try to figure out what
you're like to work with. What do you love and hate? What kind of person are
you?

You might prefer me to ask more transparent and common questions, but how will
I know you are not just giving rehearsed answers from a book? So I ask
questions that are a bit more oblique and original, designed to raise genuine
discussion.

How do you answer them? Be honest! It's not an excuse for me to get rid of
you, because I really want to hire you so I can end the extremely dull hiring
process and get back to my day job. I'm looking for how you answer the
question, not the exact words, but whether you clam up, tell a joke, go on a
long-winded story, get all excited, or whatever it is that you do.

~~~
vonmoltke
> if you've got past the CV perusal stage then it means I think you're
> probably good enough and I want to hire you. Trouble is, there are 5
> candidates and only 1 position.

I thought we had a shortage...

~~~
FilterSweep
That "shortage of tech talent" balloon has had more than a few pins pushed
into it ;)

------
unoti
> Suppose you could design your dream job that you'll be starting on Monday.
> It's at your ideal company with your ideal job title and salary. All you
> have to do is tell them what you want to do at your job and you can have it.
> What does your job entail?

Funny thing about that to me. _What_ I'm doing matters less to me than _why_
and _with whom_. I certainly know the kinds of software development and
management tasks that I enjoy doing the most. But when I look back over my
fondest memories and the biggest high points of my career, it's always about
the team. It's who I was working with, what we accomplished together.

I've been self-employed for the last several years, and that experience has
helped crystallize the importance of the team. I'd seriously consider cleaning
toilets and changing bedpans if it was with the right team for the right
reasons.

That's not likely to happen, though. So to bring it down to a more practical
level: working on going-nowhere legacy software that does something important
with a great team of people all pushing for excellence-- that would be great
for me. But doing the kind of software development I enjoy the most, with a
team of pretentious primadonnas who don't really care about actually putting
projects into the done-basket, for users who don't really want to use the
software-- that's a hell job. I speak from experience.

~~~
ska

       What I'm doing matters less to me than why and with whom. 
    

That's a perfectly reasonable answer (fleshed out a bit) to the question.

------
jbob2000
This is a pretty bad question. Since I know what job I'm applying for, I will
tailor my answer to fit the job. You're hiring me as a developer? OK, my ideal
job is a developer, i love building things and getting down to the nitty-
gritty. You're hiring a manager? OK, my ideal job is a manager, i love being
part of the bigger picture and breaking a project up into small pieces is my
forte.

An interview should just be there to weed out people with immediately obvious
problems. Use 3 month probations to determine if they are a good fit.

~~~
ccostes
Is such a 'probationary period' a common thing? Seems like it would be very
inefficient since the majority of the hiring cost is up-front.

As a candidate, I would be attracted to an offer from a company saying 'we
like you, you're hired!' much more than one saying 'you can have this job for
now, but we might take it away in 3 months if we don't like you.'

~~~
bildung
Its common in many european countries. After the probation period ends,
employee protection laws kick in, e.g. you cannot simply fire an employee
after that period.

IMO it's a good way to learn about each other without the negative consquences
for both parties. (Not only the employer has a disincentive to fire after the
probation period: Leaving as an employee in Germany means you're blocked from
the higher variant of unemployment benefits.)

~~~
kawera
Same in Brazil.

------
sown
This seems like kind of a trick question. The vast majority of interviewers
want to hear what they want to hear, or at least have you agree.

We've all been conditioned to expect this. Then, here comes along someone with
a different question where if you answer it differently, you probably don't
get the job.

In my mind, I'm going to ask, "Is this a serious question? Are we just filling
time?"

> Are you ready to be CEO of Google on Monday?" If they say yes, then I'll
> probably entertain myself by asking how they'd run the company while
> mentally moving on to the next candidate.

This question...it just seems so loaded and I have to disagree. I can get a
'no' vote (which is enough to end the interview process) because I give a
silly answer to an uncertainly question.

If I say, "I want to build apps for non-profits" is that going to sink me
during a QA interview? What if I say, "I want to enable non-profits with
tech?" during a product or project manager interview? To me, both of those
things are heavily intersected. But it seems like I can get stopped right
there. God forbid if someone says they want to be a stay-at-home parent.

I'm going to cold read you and tell you what you want to hear.

I feel this question is less-than-helpful because it doesn't really extract
any extra information yet is approached with a different angle to make the
question intentionally tricky and make good candidates fail.

~~~
ryandrake
>> Are you ready to be CEO of Google on Monday?" If they say yes, then I'll
probably entertain myself by asking how they'd run the company while mentally
moving on to the next candidate.

> This question...it just seems so loaded and I have to disagree. I can get a
> 'no' vote (which is enough to end the interview process) because I give a
> silly answer to an uncertainly question.

It's a silly question, and the commentary about moving on to the next
candidate shows ugly dismissiveness. What if the person sitting across from
you COULD be the next CEO of Google, and you're blowing off a great find? It's
not like there's only one person on Earth who is qualified to be the CEO of
Google. Plenty of people could do it. I'd argue that the higher you go up the
chain of command at any company, the less specific a skill set the position
needs, to the point where many more people out there could be CEO of Google
than could be Principal Compiler Technologies Engineer.

As others have mentioned, mostly the question is silly because, like most
behavioral questions, the correct answer is: take some time to figure out what
the interviewer wants to hear and feed it back to them.

~~~
jldugger
> What if the person sitting across from you COULD be the next CEO of Google,
> and you're blowing off a great find?

Then hopefully you're not on Google's CEO interview committee, and the
candidate is overqualified for whatever position you have, and hiring them
comes with a risk of being unable to retain them when the much greater
opportunity comes knocking, leaving you where you started but a couple of
months down the line.

------
cryoshon
Pose a game-fantasy question and you get gamed fantasy answers.

"Realistic self-view

The first thing I try to figure out is if this person's job description
matches their skills. If a 22 year old tells me they want to be CEO of Google
next week, for example, it looks like either their perspective on their skills
is flawed or they didn't really grasp what I was asking. In that case, I say
something like, "remember, you're starting this job on Monday. Are you ready
to be CEO of Google on Monday?" If they say yes, then I'll probably entertain
myself by asking how they'd run the company while mentally moving on to the
next candidate."

This isn't telling you anything about what the candidate can actually do. It's
telling you whether you as the interviewer think the candidate is capable of
doing what they say-- and you probably have only minimal prior knowledge. It's
also telling you that you didn't form the question with enough qualifications
if you're receiving answers which you consider to be outside the realm of
expected results. I'm also going to go ahead and say that there are 22 year
olds who could be the CEO of Google next week, whether or not the author has
faith in them.

I really hate interviewing for this very reason. Every question is a trick
question. Every question must be gamed. Every question that you will ask (be
forced to pose in order to game the situation of having a question for them)
will be dodged and gamed similarly. In light of that, this question by the
author isn't so bad. Interviewing is going to be a joke/crapshoot/have no real
correlation to ability to do the job no matter what, so I guess this question
isn't so bad. I'll admit, I had fun with thinking of my answer-- but I know
the author wouldn't ever accept it if I answered genuinely in the fashion I
wanted to in an interview with him. Showing too much ambition in a job
interview is quite dangerous from my experience.

~~~
Thimothy
"I would love being paid for programming an IA that substitutes you and all
your kind so I don't have to stand another job interview in all my live"

Yep, way too much ambition.

------
harryh
[https://xkcd.com/1346/](https://xkcd.com/1346/)

~~~
pavornyoh
@Harryh, thanks for the laugh..:)

------
geggam
Why does anyone think these crazy questions have any relevance to work. Work
is called work because its not play. Play you do for fun. Work you do for
money. People who get paid to play are in professional sports.

I never understood why anyone thinks these questions are relevant and frankly
I wouldn't want to work for someone who thinks he can figure out a personality
with a few minutes spent in a discussion when everyone has their date face on.

------
alexandercrohde
Wow, another arbitrary interview technique of dubious worth. Yay...

"Are you ready to be CEO of Google on Monday?" If they say yes, then I'll
probably entertain myself by asking how they'd run the company while mentally
moving on to the next candidate."

Why does a young candidate believing he can be CEO of google mean he can't
work for you as a javascript developer? How do already know how good this
candidate is at business? After all, google was founded by 20 year olds with 0
business experience. Some would argue it went wrong when suited business
people took so much control over it (6 adds on a search result today).

Ultimately though, my larger point is that what objective evidence is there
that this technique is any better than a coin flip? If none, why are you
telling us?

------
learc83
Years ago, when I was in college the first time, I was a tech support
supervisor at a large retail store.

All candidates had to take an online personality test. The test was a joke. It
asked things like

"Have you ever stolen anything from work (including little things like a
pencil)?"

"Do you think it's ever ok to break the law (including minor things like
speeding)?"

Many people who took the test assumed it was trying to find out whether they'd
lie on a test and that saying yes to these questions was the correct answer.

Other people guessed correctly that the test wanted you to answer as if you
were the perfect retail automaton.

The point is that the test punished honesty. And even if this question doesn't
necessarily do that, i.e., the interviewer might be fine with answers that
include "professional athlete", "swimsuit photographer", etc..., many
candidates will think that it does. They will assume that they are supposed to
say their dream job is the job they are applying for.

~~~
geebee
These tests are so odd. But maybe, as you've pointed out, they are simply
screening for people who are aware of when and how they need to lie.

It used to be fashionable to ask "what is your greatest weakness" in
interviews. I always considered it an unfair question, but I was on an
interview panel once with a guy who loved to ask it, and I couldn't stop him.

I slowly realized that it does reveal show a person handles an unfair question
that he or she absolutely should not answer truthfully, but without stammering
or being obviously evasive.

Like I said, I wouldn't ever ask this question, I consider it to be a bit of a
trap. But maybe the people who are asking it are simply more cynical people
who are checking to see if the candidate is an equally aware cynic? Just a bit
more interview hazing, I guess.

~~~
slgeorge
If you're interviewing someone at a professional level who has more than 5?
years worth of experience then commonly a problem in an interview is that the
candidate thinks they should "win" by answering correctly. They've done enough
interviews at this point that they know 80% of the useful questions you can
ask. Sometimes it feels like 'winning' has become ingrained - since mostly
people don't _need_ the specific role ... it will be one role they are
interviewing for amongst a few - instead they should be trying to understand
whether the role/company will really be a good fit for them (and vice versa).

The 'what is your greatest weakness' question can be quite a good indicator of
that mentality - the candidate will give you a carefully chosen weakness that
they think you will think is a strength (if that makes sense). I do use it
from time to time, but mostly towards the end of an interview where I've
(hopefully) built up a picture of the person so have some ideas on areas I'm
concerned about. If I get the obvious 'marketing' answer then I'll probably
try and gently point out it will do neither of us any good to land-up in a
situation where the person is in a role they can't do or won't be satisfied
with. In a way the nature of the response is of interest - it should be an
opportunity to discuss why it's an area of weakness and what sort of
development they are considering, and for the interviewer to consider how
important that area is within the role or culture.

------
vkjv
I also have asked this question many times, but have been unable to get
anything useful out of it. I usually end up with one of three responses:

1\. Verbatim definition the positions job description. 2\. I'd be golfing or
laying on a beach. 3\. My attempts to probe deeper lead them to specific
answers and I end up with _my_ dream job and not theirs.

The article is a little light on details about your follow-up questions. Care
to share some more?

~~~
alxndr
Of the employees you've hired after hearing their answers, how have they all
been?

------
krupan
The "ready by Monday" part is apparently the author's vague way of saying,
"picture a job that is ideal in every way except that they won't give you any
time to train or otherwise come up to speed on new skills or technology."

For me an ideal job is one where I get to learn some new things, not just plug
away at stuff I'm already really good at. An ideal job needs to stretch me a
bit, allow me to grow and develop. Once the author explained what was meant by
"ready by Monday" I couldn't really come up with an _ideal_ job. A good one,
but not an _ideal_ one.

~~~
paulcole
It is also a hypothetical question that's intended to give insights into the
candidate's thought process without giving an incredibly leading question.

You are also free to imagine a position that would allow you to maximize the
value of your current skills and explain how that position would also allow
you to grown and develop new skills.

------
valarauca1
This is a bit of a tangent but ultimately related.

Back in my WoW raiding days a common question we'd ask candidates, _If you
could design an encounter what would the mechanics be?_

The way a person would answer would show a lot about them. A good raider would
go into detail talking about obscure details, talking about past encounters
they liked/disliked. You'd even hear hints of their cross class knowledge as
they'd talk about how to overcome the difficulties of their imaginary
encounter.

The worst raiders would respond with simple DPS checks, or stupid mechanics
that would prevent other classes from being competitive.

:.:.:

To be clear positions were pretty competitive. Really most Top 50 US guilds
are roughly aligned in skill level, the differences you see in positional
rankings are normally just time spent within instances. As RNG became the rule
of thumb from Sunwell on :\

~~~
FilterSweep
Take in mind that I'm not familiar with WoW but I do have extensive (and I
mean extensive) experience on WC3 as you read this:

> If you could design an encounter what would the mechanics be?

Is actually a different _sort_ of question than that posited in the OP. Your
answer to this question would be more specific, as you are asking for
_mechanics_ \- the other question is more open-ended and has many more
opportunities for pitfalls, as has been much of the discussion here on HN.

And this is all _context of the applicant_ aside. Certainly some of the most
brilliant minds play WoW (and getting a job at blizzard is tough!), but at the
same time, you will also have to sort through additional chaff that would have
already been filtered out in the resume before the OP's question was even
asked.

~~~
valarauca1
The goal is the same.

You're asking a highly opened and loaded question to ascertain knowledge of
_who_ that person is, and what they're looking for in an ideal experience to
see if your goals align with one another. My goal was more oriented via Sun
Tzu's 5 essentials of victory.

>He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its
ranks.

Fundamentally these are culture questions. Does this person fit within the
company culture of the position your offering?

------
peterburkimsher
The question removes responsibility from the interviewer, and puts all the
pressure on the candidate. Many candidates are in situations when they'd be
willing to accept something less than "ideal". This is especially true in
countries where youth unemployment is high. If someone is seeking perfection,
rather than just survival, they probably already have a job. Therefore they'd
be being headhunted, and the hiring manager will be trying to attract them,
not filter them out. I've taken some horrendously underpaid internships simply
to keep me off the streets. Did I admit my desperation at the time? Of course
not. Were those jobs a perfect match for my skills? Not exactly. But did I get
the job done, answer to my managers, and learn some new skills? Absolutely.
Even though my current job isn't totally perfect, it's better than most others
I've had before. The value of stability and years of continuous work
experience are more important to me than the minor inconveniences I'm
accustomed to here.

------
drhayes9
My favorite question to ask as the interviewee is kinda isomorphic of that
one: "If you could spare $10,000 of the engineering budget to fix anything in
your business right now, what would it be?"

I also like the similar: "If you could spend one week fixing anything in your
app, what would it be?"

~~~
ksenzee
These are great questions. I'm imagining my answers, and the answers of people
on my team, and I think they'd reveal quite a bit about us: personality,
priorities, outlook, whether we'd rather fix people problems or software
problems.

~~~
dalke
They are also highly contextual. If I've been self-employed for 5 years,
selling an app but only making $30K/year - ie, not poor, but well below market
- and decide that it's time to "get a real job", then there likely isn't
something in my app that $10K will easily fix.

~~~
drhayes9
The intent is that the job seeker asks these questions of the place that's
hiring, not the other way around.

~~~
dalke
My apologies! I missed the "as" in "to ask as the interviewee".

------
davidw
> The phrase "starting Monday" places the job in a specific time. It's clear
> that we're not talking about a position you will one day aspire to, nor are
> we talking about a dream job that can't actually exist.

Wait, what? Because it starts Monday, it can't be a fantasy dream job? That's
a non-sequitur.

~~~
RogerL
You failed to read the interviewer's mind. No job for you!

I really despair every time I read these interview threads. The number of
hoops you have to jump through, the questions that require "just so" answers
(I'm a 8 out of 10 will get you a fail for being too overconfident by some,
and a fail for not being high enough for others), measurements based on
everything BUT the one thing that matters - on the job performance, interviews
where all information is hidden to the applicant.Take this article: you
dragged me in, forcing me to take a day off with pay, and only then tell me
the actual requirements of the job? Thanks. Why didn't you put that in the job
description, an email, or tell me in a pre interview phone call? What a waste
of time.

~~~
developer1
The OP's question is one that an interviewee would love to hear if they've
saved up money and are actually searching for their dream job, while living
comfortably on those savings. This is the real annoyance with the employer-
employee relationship: the lack of any genuine relationship. Most of the time,
the employer wants the best talent without having to pay for it or
compromising on anything, and the employee just wants the highest
salary/package possible.

The real win would be this: I find a company whose product I truthfully want
to invest my interest in. You realize my potential and pay me the $150k I am
worth compared to the $80k I make now, considering I routinely provide the
quantity of work you get from 3-4 juniors at $50k each, at a superior quality
where every line of code written isn't adding to the technical debt.

Oh, and I'll take my 4-5 weeks of yearly vacation instead of the 2-3 bullshit
weeks you expect me to be satisfied with. If only more than 1% of the
companies out there actually owned a product worth being excited about. :(

------
zyxley
This doesn't seem like a very useful question, since a lot of people if
answering completely honestly would probably name things in other fields
they're specifically not doing for money or other logistical reasons
("writer", "dolphin trainer", "skydiving instructor", or whatever).

~~~
jpollock
When I was at Nortel, they sent everyone on the "Seven Habits" course. The
instructors led everyone through an analysis of what was truly important to
them.

They also bragged that something like 25% of attendees changed careers within
the year. :)

Life's too short to not be doing something you really want to do.

~~~
intopieces
>Life's too short to not be doing something you really want to do.

By that metric, a vast majority of the world is wasting their lives doing
things they don't love. Unfortunately, they are not in a position to quit
their day jobs and pursue that dream.

~~~
redblacktree
Right, and this kind of platitude is an oversimplification. There are a lot of
things to consider when it comes to fulfillment in life. For example, do you
have children? Perhaps it's more important to you to be a good father and
provide for them, even if your job is somewhat mediocre.

------
soham
Realize that an interview is more like a date, and the question is merely a
means to a conversation.

i.e. the interview depends as much on the interviewER, as it does on the
interviewEE. Questions matter, but what matters far more, is how the
interviewer judges the interviewee.

I've worked with Nicholas Zakas before. He is a sharp and thoughtful person.
Plus, he has probably given this question hundreds of times, to have a strong
BS detector. And there will be several followup questions he will ask, to
separate the wheat from the chaff.

So, is this the only question that can identify great candidates? No. Is this
one good one, that fits his evaluation style and his values? Yes, and that's
what he is sharing with us.

[About me: I run
[http://InterviewKickstart.com](http://InterviewKickstart.com) in the valley.
We prepare candidates for technical interviews, and deal with a variety of
these situations every day]

------
kpwagner
"Are you ready to be CEO of Google on Monday?" If they say yes, then I'll
probably entertain myself by asking how they'd run the company while mentally
moving on to the next candidate."

This is why I hate interviews. Interviewers can be as sadistic as they please,
get drunk on this "power", and act like jackasses. I have had only a handful
of interviews where my impression of the interviewer was not lowered
significantly over the course of the interview.

~~~
jazzyk
My answer to the question would be:

"Obviously I do not have previous experience. But I'd still give it a shot and
try to learn as much as possible on the job. Just like Larry Page did."

------
wrs
Wow, this thread has a strong attraction for the overthinkers and the
slightly-sociopathic. :)

This question, or some variant of it, is useful when both sides take it
seriously, in context, and have a mostly-honest conversation about fit between
a person and a workplace. Otherwise, not.

A lot of these comments make it sound like the goal in an interview is simply
to "play the game" to get the job, regardless of what the job turns out to
actually be like, or whether you're a good fit for the workplace culture. If
you're starving and desperate to get _any_ job, then sure, that makes sense.
Otherwise, it's not a good idea to start your relationship on that note.

It seems obvious that interviews aren't going to work well when either side is
desperate or blatantly dishonest.

------
fecak
This question is actually a potentially useful tool for closing a candidate as
well, designed to find out the candidate's interests with the answer
potentially used to demonstrate that the job being offered is a fit for the
candidate's specific filters and criteria. This isn't much different from what
an agency recruiter may ask a candidate in an initial profiling session, where
the answers will be used later to try and close a candidate on a job offer.

------
DanielBMarkham
Job interviews are negotiations. As such, the controlled release of
information is critical. "Come tell me your dreams so I can match them up
against my opportunities" is not fair to the candidate, who 1) would be an
idiot to have a dream where what you wanted was what they wanted and 2) might
very well be able to adapt to whatever your situation was. Hell, you very well
might desire to adapt your situation to the candidate.

At the end, you then step into the candidate's shoes and say something like
"Gee, looks like you missed out on a bunch of important stuff we care about.
But hey, it still might work! What do you think about that?" \-- this puts
extreme pressure on somebody who is probably just trying to figure out the
difference between what you think you want and what you actually need.

I think I'd care a lot more about a candidates values -- the ones they've
actually lived -- than what some kind of dream job is like. If you're not
dreaming of sitting on the beach spending your time as you see fit? If,
instead, your dream is to code Javascript at some company 75% of the time
while going to meetings 25%? Maybe you're either lying, are missing some key
bit of imagination, or just trying to bullshit me. Even folks who actually
spend those percentages are usually doing so because something else they value
drives them to do it.

I do not want to be cruel, but this sounds like one of those interview
questions that's just a little bit too clever for its own good. The kinda
thing you could do for a long while and get away with, because it's really
measuring the ability of the candidate to negotiate tricky manager situations,
which is in itself a valuable skill.

You are probably getting something that feels good, but is not the thing you
think you're getting.

------
ajnin
This looks like an open question to get to know the candidate but in fact it's
another way to fit the candidate in a box. Distinctions like leader/follower
don't always make sense, they are not opposites. Programming languages,
specific percentages spent coding/managing. Just a basic skill grid. The
recruiter also need to see the future to decide based on a single answer if a
candidate would be able to be CEO of Google. It's not clear why he would not.

The question is also incredibly oriented towards the recruiter's point of
view, for example why exclude the salary discussion? It seems it should be one
of the major discussion points when applying for a job. Maybe I'm mistaken but
I think people work for a company and not for their toy projects because of
money.

Focusing on starting next Monday isn't a particularly good idea either, good
candidates can learn quickly and what they can't do on Monday they could
probably do in a month.

Well, that's a pretty bad question.

------
angdis
I think that technical hiring managers tend to get obsessed with finding the
"ultimate" interview question as a short-cut for evaluating candidates.

The problem is that such a question doesn't exist, or rather, that it may very
well be a different question for every possible combination of interviewer and
interviewee. The OP and those who take his advice are going to get lost in the
weeds if they try to read too much into the answer to this "super question".
Just pay attention to what the candidate is saying, their background, their
responses to behavioral questions, their personality and their aptitudes.
There's no shortcuts and there's a huge heap of subjectivity required to
assess somebody for "fit".

Modern organizations have been hiring people for decades. If there were
actually a "best way" to hire/evaluate people, everyone would be using it.

------
mfringel
"Suppose you could design your dream job that you'll be starting on Monday.
It's at your ideal company with your ideal job title and salary. All you have
to do is tell them what you want to do at your job and you can have it. What
does your job entail?"

#savedyouaclick

------
brayton
Are we making an assumption that the candidate doesn't just say what I want to
hear? Reminds me of economics class - "Ok class, before we begin you must
first go forward with the assumption all people make rational decisions."

------
elevenfist
> "I operate on the mindset that the damage done by filling a position with a
> bad fit is far greater than the damage of not having enough people to do
> work, and so I believe in optimizing to find the right person for the job."

Who is this guy kidding? This question will simply weed out those who are
actually honest. If the person wants the job they're going to tell you what
you want to hear to get the job. Unless he's being subtle, and "The right
person for the job" is the one most willing to tailor himself to the needs of
the employer, and skilled in double-speak.

What a ridiculous question.

------
mootothemax
How are you meant to objectively and unbiasedly grade candidates with such a
question?

For all you know, you could interview the same candidate before and after
lunch and come out with completely different views each time.

------
sandworm101
Design your dream job? That sort of question is code for: you aren't in the
running. It is a stock question, something asked of all the candidates. Very
very few people who are asked such questions are ever hired imho.

An interviewer who thinks you have any hope of landing the job should (a)
already have read your resume and (b) be under instructions from someone above
them regarding your application. A good interview is one where the interviewer
is vetting a candidate, not trying to find a candidate. There should be a
discussion of the problems/tasks for which you are to be hired. Whether or not
you will turn out to be a "good fit" will come from that discussion, not stock
questions.

A job is about pay for work. The only honest answer to "what is your dream
job?" is "You give me 1,000,000$ and I go home at 9:30." Everything short of
that is a lie. So an answering candidate must create in their mind some
parameters to bookend their dream job. They try to figure out what the
interviewer wants to hear and form a lie based on those expectations. The real
meet of the question is therefore "What do you think I want to hear?" The
winning candidate ends up being the one who best knew the interviewer's
expectations and crafts the best lie. Unless you are hiring people for a
improv comedy team, that knowledgeable liar is isn't the candidate you want.
It's a toxic process best avoided.

~~~
alkonaut
> Everything short of that is a lie.

I think most people would do some kind of "work" even if they didn't have to
work for money. Especially true for developers.

If I could create my dream job with a dream team of mentors (say "I'd work
with Carmack and a few other guys working on a new game engine for VR") I'd
certainly do it for free if I was already rich. And I'd do it for half my
current salary regardless.

I could make up 100 such dream jobs within an hour, and I wouldn't need to
lie, nor be unrealistic about what I'd do in the position.

I think it can be a good indicator of what the candidate is passionate about,
what their interests are, what their insights about their capabilities are and
so on. Not saying it's the bestest interview question ever, but just like my
favourite "Tell me about some code you wrote that you really like" it can give
an insight into what drives and motivates a developer.

~~~
sandworm101
"Jobs" where you aren't working for money aren't really jobs. They are
hobbies. Hobbies can consume your entire life, you can even hire people to
support your hobby, but unless you are doing it for the money it isn't really
a job.

I worked with/for too many people who are in fact working on their hobby.
Running a tech startup is almost a fashion statement in some wealthy circles.
The problems start when things get boring. The person who doesn't care about
the money tends to loose interest quickly. The absent boss, the founder who no
longer comes to the office every day, is a real nightmare.

------
mcphage
From the question:

> It's at your ideal company with your ideal job title and salary.

From his discussion:

> I immediately exclude discussion of company, title, and salary, because
> these are the things people think they want but can't really affect my
> decision.

Then why ask it? Why make it part of the question, if the information is
meaningless? If you asked me what I wanted to do, I could come up with an
answer pretty quick. But if you added in stuff about ideal title, salary, etc,
then I would have a lot of trouble answering that part—which you don't even
want or need.

~~~
robotresearcher
You misunderstood the intent. He intended "it's a given that it's at your
ideal company with your ideal job title and salary, so we don't have to talk
about those".

~~~
mcphage
Ah, gotcha. That makes sense, then.

------
Yxven
If I could take over as the CEO of Google on Monday, I would do it in a heart
beat. Whether my skills fit the job is irrelevant. You're wrongly assuming
that I expect to be great at my dream job. I don't. I'd expect a learning
experience. I'm sure I'd get fired eventually. I'd wipe my tears with the
money I got from my golden parachute, add my years as Google's CEO to my
resume, and start to campaign for other CEO jobs that I'm now "qualified" for.

Eventually, I'd become a decent CEO.

------
neprune
I think this question is good precisely for the same reason a lot of people
are saying it's bad; it's really easy to give a bad answer, especially if the
job isn't close to your ideal job. The article talks about waiting as long as
it takes to get the best candidate, and in that regard, this question is
perfect. Sure some people will do a good job at gaming question but if a
candidate clears this hurdle, they are more likely to enjoy their role and
therefore perform better.

------
strommen
I think the entire premise of hiring for fit in terms of leader vs. follower,
etc. is flawed. Has anybody ever actually worked with an engineer that was a)
good at their job, b) not a total jackass, c) their employer would have been
better off had they not hired them?

[meta] Also, I'm pretty sure that here on HN, an article about hiring is going
to get more upvotes and discussion if, like this one, its advice is _bad_.

------
agentgt
I started a successful recruiting software company about two years ago. I have
learned many things about the industry and recruiting. Some from our own
analytics (on any given day we get an enormous amount of job applies coming in
to our system) and others just passing observations (talking to recruiters,
staffing firms, and corp hr).

Three things that I have learned ... job hunters are desperate and will do
surprising things to get a job (more so for bad candidates), every recruiter
seems to think they have some secret trick for filtering candidates and
finally companies in general love to make candidates go through an enormous
amount of illogical jump-through-these-hoops, quack like a chicken, stand on
one leg steps as possible.

While I appreciate the writers intent trying to help candidates I also think
he is massively underestimating people looking for jobs. They are not dumb and
if it takes a question as simple as that during an interview to make some
determination on hiring perhaps some better filtering needs to be done prior
(ie checking them out on linkedin and looking at their resume/application).

------
Xyik
Which part of this question ensures the candidate is capable of doing the job?

~~~
pavornyoh
@Xyik, I agree with you. Let's not forget job descriptions are written so
poorly, it does not tell you exactly what the company is looking for. So for a
candidate whose background closely match the job description, I don't see how
this is a good question to ask.

------
fineman
It seems pretty reasonable. As in, can be answered honestly without ruining
your chances and reveals valuable information to the applicant _and_ the
employer. But I assume that the applicant actually honestly believes
themselves to be fit for a role. After all, the desired goal of the question
is to weed out people who can't or won't perform the needed tasks.

If I really thought coming to an office every day at 9am was your idea I
wouldn't offer a salary. There's an understanding that the salary is
compensation for the difference between ideal and reality. Even if I were to
believe you, it wouldn't be in your best interest to tell me my job was ideal
for you...

I think the scenario people imagine in all these interviewing-question threads
is themselves looking for work and all that is available is a junior dev
position in an unpopular language, or a QA/QE role, etc, and that they have to
lie and pretend their life-goal is picking up after others in a corporate
environment. Like a waterfall Java QE.

If you could honestly describe that as your ideal you really wouldn't be the
type of person I'd hire... But if you respond that your ideal is a dev role in
a better language I'd probe your dev process and see what you'd do to ensure
the connection between customer-spec-code-reality. Then I could say "Well, the
code you'd be reviewing is legacy and Java, so that's inflexible, but our test
infrastructure is out of date and needs to be re-integrated - I think that
could be done in your language of choice ... etc"

Ideally you'd offer these yourself. "I see myself in more of a full-time dev
role, but with so much legacy code the sane thing to do is to get a reliable
and useful set of tests running before the product is modernized. So as long
as the QE role involved creation of new tests and new test frameworks - and
especially if you'll let me implement at least one in Xlang to demonstrate its
benefits ..."

------
yarrel
That's a very useful question for deciding who not to work for.

------
jmmcd
> It sounds to me like this isn't a great match for what you're looking for.
> Do you agree?

This is the part that reveals the whole thing as nonsense. My "ideal job" is
not what I'm "looking for", therefore this conclusion is impossible.

------
powera
I find it astonishing how many people's snarky responses here would actually
be astonishingly useful to an interviewer. Not as a disqualifier even. The
person who wants to spend all day building robots to feed the poor, and the
person who wants to spend all day writing are probably not going to both be
happy in the same job. And the person who "I just want to be a developer, I
love doing business development" is going to always tell you yes regardless of
the situation. And the person who sits and thinks for 5 minutes ... probably
needed some more encouragement from the interviewer.

~~~
sheepmullet
> The person who wants to spend all day building robots to feed the poor, and
> the person who wants to spend all day writing are probably not going to both
> be happy in the same job

People don't actually work that way though. My favourite sport is rugby union,
my second favourite sport is swimming.

These sports are very different and yet I am passionate about them both. Rugby
league and American football don't interest me at all despite being much
closer to my favourite sport than swimming.

------
tfigueroa
> I don't want to get into a discussion about titles because they are mostly
> meaningless; ...

Quite untrue, except at the fringes of corporate hierarchy. It's hard to take
the rest of the article seriously after that.

------
hawleyal
Isn't that the entire point of an interview to suss out the response to that
question through, albeit, through indirect means. If you just ask it directly,
you're not going to get honest answers.

~~~
logfromblammo
~Just put the iocaine powder in both wine goblets and be done with it.~

You're not going to get entirely honest answers as long as the respondent
believes there is something to be gained from dishonesty. And guess what? In
an interview, there is always something to be gained.

The only way you get a chance is by having an accomplice clip on a "VISITOR"
badge, to ask the question outside the interview room.

------
AcerbicZero
I enjoy questions such as this during interviews because, if I've handled the
interview well so far, I can turn the question around a bit and use it to feel
out the interviewer's opinion on a more important topic, or reinforce one of
my previously well received comments.

On the other hand if I've been blowing the interview, its a decent chance for
me to try and get things pointed in a positive direction again, and/or lighten
the room up. Either way, its a better experience than just having someone read
off a series of questions like a robot.

------
incepted
The answer you will get is not to the question "What is your ideal job?" but
"What is a good sounding job that the candidate can pretend he wants that will
cause you to hire him?".

------
radmuzom
I did not enjoy the article as much as I like the author's (Nicholas C. Zakas)
other articles or books [1]. However, he has also written some more "useful"
interview related articles earlier -

On interviewing front-end engineers (2013)

Interviewing the front-end engineer (2010)

Surviving an interview with me (2007)

[1] [http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Object-Oriented-
JavaScript-...](http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Object-Oriented-JavaScript-
Nicholas-Zakas/dp/1593275404) \- one of the best JavaScript books ever written

------
monksy
If it was answered honestly. I wonder how the answer of:

In the morning [not a consistent time] I'll reflect on what I need to do for
the day, examine goals that need to be completed, plan out the day, start the
first pomodoro, mid day: take a break by walking around outside, finish up the
pomodoros, and take the last one to reflect on what I did, how the goals went,
and how to improve. All which would have nothing to do with Agile or being
questioned on how much I got done in x time.

~~~
slgeorge
You answered how you like to work, not what sort job it is. They may be the
same thing for you - 'it doesn't matter what I work on as long as I can work
in the following way' \- which would be worth exploring with you further.
Presumably, he'd ask you some of the other parameters - like what languages
you prefer. Then in stage two, he'd then discuss how the way they worked is
(or is not) similar to your desired way of working.

------
lazyant
So this is the job interview equivalent of the ice-breaker "what would a day
in your life look like if money was no objection?"

------
kafkaesq
_Suppose you could design your dream job that you 'll be starting on Monday.
It's at your ideal company with your ideal job title and salary. All you have
to do is tell them what you want to do at your job and you can have it. What
does your job entail?_

What a horrible filter question -- unless your goal is to attract consummate
brownnoser, that is.

------
imglorp
We hugged it down. Mirror cache backup:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:/...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.nczonline.net/blog/2015/09/my-
favorite-interview-question/)

------
nigel182
Judging by the comments here, I would be one of the few people to answer this
question honestly. Although I haven't been desperate for a job in a long time,
I think an honest discussion around this question would be best for both
sides.

------
kelvin0
This is brilliant, and can be used to gather much more about a candidate than
any of the usual lame 'how would your friends describe you...'. Most
interviews seem scripted, and do not really assess a candidate in depth

------
stuaxo
TBH this is not much better than "where do you see yourself in 5 years"

------
rootedbox
My answer would be simple. Roll my eyes. Stand up, and walk out the door.

~~~
coherentpony
Care to elaborate?

~~~
savanaly
It's the sort of question that would be asked by someone that the poster
you're responding to probably considers very much part of the outgroup and so
would take pleasure in brushing off and condescending to.

~~~
yarrel
It's a question designed to get you to either to lie or to show bad faith.

Someone who asks it is not someone you want to work for, whichever group you
feel you do or don't belong to.

And you are doing what you are (without evidence or reason) accusing the OP of
doing. So which particular group dynamics do you have in mind?

------
donovanr
I enjoyed reading this as written rather than as (I assume) intended: "The
enormity of defining any job they want can be overwhelming..."

------
claysmithr
My dream job would be to have enough money in the bank to live off of a 100k
salary for the rest of my life without working.

------
dc2447
My question is the reverse:

"What's the worst culture you have been part of at a company and were you able
to change it"

~~~
RogerL
What does that tell you about what matters: on the job performance? What's a
pass? What's a fail?

Two people could tell you the same thing. for example, they doggedly raised
issues, keep escalating, ended up talking with the CEO directly, and couldn't
make a change happen. Except, in case 1, it turns out there were good reasons,
or bad reasons, but the person alienated everyone and made it impossible for
them to effectively do their job (bad culture if so, but hey, you need to be
aware of what you can do and not do). Second person did all that, but cemented
relationships in the processs. Chances are you won't know the difference
between the two.

Then take two more people. they barely tried. But one person was just not very
pushy, and the other one rightly decoded the political landscape and rightly
figured out that they would accomplish nothing, and probably get fired to
boot.

How do you distinguish between those 4 stark choices, let alone the continuum
of situations that actually exist? (people who just weren't effective at
making the change, people that misjudged what the change should be, and so on)

------
kozukumi
Well it is a damn sight better than how many window cleaners are there in
London.

------
pavornyoh
The question is actually not a good question. In today's day and age, the
really intelligent jobseekers don't have time for these kind of questions. The
hiring company should rather be focused on how to convince a good applicant to
come work for them instead of these type of questions.

~~~
slgeorge
This question is focused on convincing good applicants to work for them. The
structure of the interview is:

a. Have candidate define their perfect role b. Explain to candidate how actual
role lines-up with desired role they defined

It works because if both sides are honest then there's a positive exchange of
what the candidate wants, and what the role has to offer. Presumably, if the
interviewer really wants the candidate, then they'll explain all the ways in
which the role on offer matches the ideal.

------
dpeck
just answer one level up from what you're interviewing for.

Junior Dev -> Dev Senior Dev -> Team Lead Team Lead -> VP of Engineering or
CTO

Do same with salary. Whatever position you're interviewing for * 1.3.

------
sparkzilla
The best question is always: Why wouldn't we hire you?

------
jackmaney
That's a terrible question. You may as well just ask "Hey, can you please slip
up and say something incredibly stupid and/or offensive, so that I can have an
excuse to end this interview? It'd be great if you could just walk right into
this trap that's not-so-cleverly-disguised as a question whose answer isn't
even vaguely my business. Thanks!"

EDIT: Oh, and I skimmed further and found this gem:

> I never let people opt-out of the question

What a pile of arrogant crap. You're interviewing a candidate, _NOT_
interrogating a prisoner. Get over yourself.

~~~
Retra
If they want to end the interview, it doesn't matter what question they ask,
because they won't be listening to your answer anyway.

~~~
jackmaney
Exactly. One can opt out of literally any interview question by simply ending
the interview.

~~~
jazzyk
I would not hire you because of your lack of social skills. Yes, the question
is a bit silly, but as an adult you need to be able to deal with
silly/annoying questions gracefully. Any polite, hopefully humorous answer
would do here.

------
draw_down
This is an interesting thought experiment, but my problem is that it's
considered a bad thing if the candidate's ideal job is substantially different
from the one they're interviewing for.

Why should an actual job line up with an ideal at all? Shouldn't we just
evaluate the candidate for how well they would perform at the actual job in
question, instead of worrying about how it lines up with some scenario they've
been asked to conjure up?

This strikes me as a backdoor to the old "passion" canard.

------
benihana
> _If they say yes, then I 'll probably entertain myself by asking how they'd
> run the company while mentally moving on to the next candidate._

How condescending and arrogant do you have to be to take this kind of attitude
to someone who _answers the question you just asked them_? What's the point of
asking the question if you're not going to listen to people's answers and
think about them? I can't imagine someone who takes such a dismissive approach
to candidates is much of a good boss.

> _I immediately exclude discussion of company, title, and salary, because
> these are the things people think they want but can 't really affect my
> decision._

> _Sometimes the scope of this question is too big for people to grasp_

> _They are just indicators to dig deeper, you 're not going to trick someone
> who knows what they're doing._

>* In most cases, the candidates have thanked me for the exercise because it
helped them really narrow in on what they're passionate about and what type of
job they should be looking for.*

The arrogance and of the author and the lack of empathy and respect for the
people they're talking to is really offputting. I'm sure people are just
lining up to thank this guy for this stimulating and amazing question that
saved them and helped them figure out who they really were. Christ.

------
luckydude
My favorite interview question is different but it has served me well over the
years when hiring software devs:

Tell me about any software project that was 100% done by you (code, regression
tests, docs, web site if there is one, mailing list if there is one, etc) that
has been used by at least 10 people, none of whom contacted you for any help
(thank you emails aren't help). The software doesn't have to be a big deal,
years ago I wrote some regexp enabled wrappers for cp/mv such that you could
do

    
    
        move '*.c' '*.c++'
    

and posted it to usenet. Something like that counts.

What I'm trying to tease out is how much of the dev process can this person
handle. And I'm trying to see if they tinker on their own. It's a bit of red
flag for me if the person doesn't have any examples of this sort of thing.

~~~
ajnin
That's a rather absurd set of constraints. Do you hire people to only work
100% alone on projects ? Would Linus Torvalds be a "red flag" because he's
accepting contributions to Linux ?

Why 10 people ? There is no link between popularity and code quality.
Presumably the developer won't be also in charge of marketing.

Did the piece of code you posted to usenet have tests, doc, a website and a
mailing list ? How do you know that you had 10 users who never contacted you ?

In our industry programmers aren't allowed to be simply professionals. They
are always expected to be "passionate" and if they don't program day and night
and in their spare time then it is suspicious.

~~~
luckydude
The point of the question is to find out what the candidate can do. If you
interview a lot of people you will find that a lot of people claim they did
more than they actually did.

As for 10 people, you typically get some sort of feedback when you put stuff
out there. What I was trying to say is "can you produce something that at
least 10 people can install and use without having to ask you how does this
work".

In my experience, the people that have put together some small open source (or
not, I don't care about the license) project by themselves are in a somewhat
different league. They can handle a broader set of problems, they don't depend
on others to do the docs, tests, marketing, whatever. We're not talking about
photoshop here, it could be some tool you wrote to do galleries of your
photos.

A buddy of mine has a different way of asking a similar question: "If we
needed you to, would you sweep the floors?"

We're both trying to get at the capabilities of the candidate.

I'm not asking you (or anyone) to program "day and night" but I do like it
when people do it because they like it. I've done plenty of free stuff and
I've found it rewarding.

