I completely agree.  One of the people I used to do interviews with would look 
through the resume, etc. and then say something like "this all looks good. Tell 
me about something you've done".  And we'd move on to talk about projects and 
how they tackled it, etc. 
 
We didn't give tests, just questions like  "if we asked you to do this, on 
something you haven't seen or used before, how would you go about it".   Or 
pretend I'm the customer.  I want to do this.  How would you go about it?  it 
wasn't about getting a 'correct' answer, it was about how they went about 
solving the problem.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Owen DeLong" <o...@delong.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 1:33pm
To: "Michael Thomas" <m...@mtcc.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: questions asked during network engineer interview




On Jul 14, 2020, at 10:20 , Michael Thomas <[ m...@mtcc.com ]( 
mailto:m...@mtcc.com )> wrote:


 
On 7/13/20 8:16 PM, Greg Skinner via NANOG wrote:If you ever decide to revisit 
this subject, I recall it was covered here in [ this thread started by Bill 
Herrin ]( https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2012-July/149687.html ).
My general feelings on the subject of tech interviews are summarized in the 
“interview anti-loop” section of [ this article by Steve Yegge ]( 
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/03/get-that-job-at-google.html ).   
Although it is targeted to people seeking software engineering jobs at FANG 
(and FANG-like) companies, IMO the general tone is applicable to other tech 
careers, even network engineering.  I have seen numerous articles (and 
subsequent discussions) on this subject on forums such as Quora, Medium, and 
Hacker News.
 
That blog post is everything that is wrong with software interviews. It's fine 
to ask intricate algorithm questions for somebody fresh out of school because 
what else are you going to ask them? But for somebody who's years out of school 
and has lots of experience, the intricate details of various algorithms fade 
especially ones that you don't use very often, or are embedded in library 
routines you'd be fired for if you tried to reinvent them. Telling people they 
have to go back to school for stuff they won't be using on the job is 
offensive.I once failed a network engineering interview because I couldn’t 
recite the OSPF LSA types by number from memory. It was fine, the fact that was 
a key question in the interview convinced me that I had no more desire to work 
there than they had to hire me.



My personal method is to devise a problem and actually work with them... 
because that's what I (or others) are going to be doing. How well can they get 
the requirements? How do they zero in on how to solve it? You can take this as 
deep or shallow as you like. Often I'd give it as a homework assignment if I 
liked them.I prefer this approach as well. Depending on the level of 
interviewee, I like to pull up a real world scenario from my past and see how 
they approach it. I’m not nearly as concerned if they get to the right solution 
as I want to see how they go about identifying and solving the problem. Do they 
ask questions that narrow their focus and identify the issue, or do they start 
trying random things hoping to stumble across a solution without understanding 
the problem?
The former moves on to the next steps towards employment. The latter is dropped 
from consideration.



My personal theory is software interviewing is basically a hazing ritual where 
the interviewers are trying to fluff their own privates, and it's almost to a 
one male. I wrote this post a while ago:
[ http://rip-van-webble.blogspot.com/2013/07/interviews-as-hazing-rituals.html 
]( http://rip-van-webble.blogspot.com/2013/07/interviews-as-hazing-rituals.html 
)
MikeNot being a developer (at least not for the last 25+ years), I haven’t done 
many “software” interviews, but I’ve been through network and sysadmin 
interviews that ran the gamut. Frankly, the ones that seemed to be more about 
fluffing privates were the companies I put less focus on going forward. The 
interviewers that seemed to match my style and wanted to see me do real-world 
things like troubleshooting or solving design problems or identifying 
architectural flaws in a proposed solution usually resulted in mutual respect 
and I usually moved forward through the interview processes. On the few 
occasions where I got a job out of a fluffing interview, it almost universally 
turned out to be one I wished I hadn’t taken.
Owen

Reply via email to