Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling
 
PerlMonks  

Re: An Interview Quandry

by BrowserUk (Patriarch)
on Oct 12, 2003 at 02:41 UTC ( [id://298580]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to An Interview Quandry

This thread reminds me of a rumour I heard when I first did work for IBM. The story went that they often arranged interviews in the period running up to lunch, and if the candidate looked promising, offer to stand them lunch in the company resturant prior to continuing in the afternoon. When sitting down to lunch, the candidate was watched to see if they used additional salt and pepper. If they did so without having tasted the food first to see if it actually needed it, this was considered a black mark, indicative of an impetuous and/or imprudent (sp?) personality.

Following lunch, the candidate would be informed that the company policy was for no alcohol on the premises, but that there was a sport club bar in the grounds where this rule was relaxed and was taken along to "see the facilities". Once there, the interviewer would ask the candidate what he would like to drink!

The "correct answer" -- fruit juice, a small beer, coffee or "Nothing thanks." -- varied depending upon the teller, but all choices had some significance and it wasn't always a "bad thing" to opt for the beer, or the safe bet to go for coffee.

I can see how the "left over" white board code could be construed into some kind of "psych test". And any response, could be a double-edged sword. You say something and you could be perceived as arrogant. You don't, timid or lacking confidence. You do, "Why was he nosing around the room". You don't, "Did he miss it?"

If I noticed, I might say something like. "Interesting. That's not the way I would have done it!" as a parting shot.

That is, if the idea that it might be some kind of "secret test" didn't cross my mind, because if it did, I am quite likely to react quite differently.

If I could confirm the idea that I was being "secretly evaluated", I might seriously question myself if this was a place that I wanted to work!

It's a bit like the old standby. "Why do you want to come to work for us?". The best answer in my opinion, whether as an interviewer or an intervieweƩ, is: "I'm not sure that I do yet. That's why we are interviewing each other isn't it?". Too smug?


Examine what is said, not who speaks.
"Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
"Think for yourself!" - Abigail
Hooray!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: An Interview Quandry
by dws (Chancellor) on Oct 12, 2003 at 03:57 UTC
    When sitting down to lunch, the candidate was watched to see if they used additional salt and pepper. If they did so without having tasted the food first to see if it actually needed it, this was considered a black mark, indicative of an impetuous and/or imprudent (sp?) personality.

    The version of the story I heard attributed this to Henry Ford, but the idea is the same. If someone starts making adjustments to food before they take the time to evaluate whether adjustments are needed, that might be an indicator that they'll make arbitrary adjustments in other things, like project requirements or schedules.

Re: Re: An Interview Quandry
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 12, 2003 at 07:02 UTC

    I'm curious about the IBM rumours, where you working there before 1993? I've heard some horror stories prior to Gerstner becoming CEO, but haven't heard any about the period since.

      I was contracted to IBM, at various sites, pretty much continuously from '86 through '95. I remember "The Biscuit Man"'s appointment in '93. Coming, as it did, shortly after the extreme trauma following the company posting it's $5 billion loss in 1992, the impact of his arrival (at my grunt level) was pretty much masked by the policies that had been put in-place by his predecessors. Particularly 2 savage rounds of the Skill Rebalancing Option (SRO).

      As an external, especially in the midst of such blood-letting, I was more tuned to keeping my head below the parapette and doing my best to remain employed.

      I will say that from my viewpoint he did remove some of the stuffiness that had been present in my rare escursions at the senior managerial level, but beyond that, I could really say I personally noted much change.

      I think that the summation of his IBM career that I read somewhere (maybe The Times), when he retired in '01, "Good Manager. Poor Entrepreneur." is probably pretty accurate.

      I was working abroad from '95 on, so I pretty much lost touch with the internal view from that point.


      Examine what is said, not who speaks.
      "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
      "Think for yourself!" - Abigail
      Hooray!

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://298580]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (3)
As of 2024-04-25 12:51 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found