Does it at all strike you as weird that in the case where your process is giving a false signal you're suggesting how the other person should act differently?
You can't control the hiring company's process, who the company picks as an interviewer and you don't know what else is going on in their day/life - but what you can control are your questions so you can project a positive image no matter what. I'm helping you here. My reframe isn't just "how to sound less like a dick" - although there is that - it's also a way to demonstrate maturity and positive signal at the same time which helps ensure you're leveled appropriately too.
Interviewing may be a craps shoot, but you can always adjust the odds in your favor.
You can. You're an interviewer. Lost of people on this site are interviewers.
I get that your advice is more useful to interviewers. I get the stuff about maturity, and so on. No reason to bring it up again.
What you don't seem to get is that every bit of your comments take the side of the interviewer as an immutable force that must be adapted to by the interviewee. If a few tweaks can have such a big impact on a classifying mechanism, maybe there's something wrong with the mechanism.
At the very least I just want to point out that you could have the reaction "This makes me realize the mistakes in my interviewing and how I will change and suggest others do." vs "Here's how candidates should act differently to not give a negative impression to important people like me."
> "Here's how candidates should act differently to not give a negative impression to important people like me."
I'm only important in the sense that my job is to obtain a fair and consistent evaluation of someone along a defined set of criteria - to see if there's a good mutual fit! I want a candidate to succeed once hired, so I'm looking for signals that they would succeed. A mis-hire sucks because getting fired sucks. That's why I'm also looking for signals they would not succeed. A lot of the time we try and avoid false-positives at the cost of false-negatives.
We're looking for certain things, and in the scope of just a 45m or 1h window it's really hard to get a complete picture of who someone is. This is also why have multiple interviewers ask many different kinds of questions.
I'm quite sympathetic to your position and I'm always super active in hiring wherever I work. I built our Mobile Staff+ interview loop at my current employer and trained up a most of the interviewers!
I do my best to make the process suck less for all involved, but folks like me won't always be on the other side. Even at employers you'd otherwise love! That's why I was hoping to provide some quick tips to eliminate potential roadblocks no matter who you find yourself up against.
He is impersonating one party and telling you how that person will clearly get a false signal from your actions. What do you expect him to do? To tell the party that isn't part of the conversation how to improve?
