No they told me they were looking for the "I don't know" moment. It had to do with knowing ones limits and less about working through the problem. Once yo know your limits you can rethink your attack on improving them .. rinse/repeat/rinse/repeat..
that sounded very Confucius of me but ...its Friday back off :D --- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.riagenic.com On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 1:59 PM, mike smith <meski...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Scott Barnes <scott.bar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> RE: Boss question. >> Yeah, negative will always trump positive in short term and long term >> memory recall as it was more memorable. At times we don't often >> realize the positive until we are faced with the negative and if a >> candidate spends a lot of time isolating the negative in an interview, >> give em the benefit of the doubt as you did ask the question - that >> and "Objection your honor! relevance?" >> >> I'd also argue that your line of questioning is weighted in a negative >> influence, you're actually leading them down the path of negativity >> and then looking to penalizing them for not being positive? Its human >> phsycology that we reflect those we are looking to impress through >> mimicry... grab 5 random men put them in a group and tell them they >> need to spend 1 day with one another and each has to vote the one >> person to win $10,000 ...watch the dynamics unfold specifically how >> the emotive responses etc shift depending on the alpha male's >> dominance. >> >> >> If you really want to test a candidate ask them random questions, the >> objective here isn't to see if they know xyz like the back of thier >> hand, it's about guaging their ability to work under pressure and more >> importantly their communication skills. The rest you can retrofit. >> >> When I went through some Google interviews they would ask me some >> really random questions - 3 rounds of interviews before I got the role >> offer - and it was things like... "So, put together a class that >> randomly shufflers a pack of cards..." so you answer (all via the >> phone may i add). They then went "cool, now that would work ok for 52 >> cards but now they're infinite amount"... i went into a dribbling >> mess. The next question after that was "can you use an @ inside XML?" > > The infinite array of one ohm resistors is a toughie if they want proof > rather than an answer. > >> >> then followed by "describe how the internet works to a non-technical >> person using a metaphor".. >> > > What is sharepoint good for? > >> >> There was no clear rhythm to their questions, it was just fast pace >> "how long can i attack this guy with variety level of intellectual >> questions before he says I don't know and is able to also communicate" > > It's not so much "I don't know" as "how would you find the answer to this > thing that you don't know" > >> >> was pretty much the crux of it. I liked that interview more than my >> Microsoft one...as it felt like i was being interviewed..not being >> asked random questions that have no point other than to make the >> interviewer feel a little more in control over the process... >> >> >> >> >> --- >> Regards, >> Scott Barnes >> http://www.riagenic.com >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 9:51 AM, mike smith <meski...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Dylan Tusler >> > <dylan.tus...@sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au> wrote: >> >> >> >> Seriously, though, I was reading a book called "The Gift of Fear" >> >> recently, and in a section about avoiding hiring people who are likely >> >> to go >> >> postal on you, it had some interview questions that I jotted down. >> >> We've >> >> actually had some unstable people here from time to time, and they take >> >> a >> >> bit of managing, so I thought it was worthwhile keeping the questions >> >> handy. >> >> >> >> I share them here: >> >> "Describe the best boss you ever had" and "Describe the worst boss you >> >> ever had." >> >> Danger signs: >> >> * Speaks for just a moment about best boss, but waxes on >> >> enthusiastically >> >> about worst one. >> >> * Uses expressions like "Personality conflict" to explain why things >> >> didn't work out. >> >> * Ridicules former employer. >> >> * Does not take responsibility for any prior conflict. >> >> >> > >> > That's an interesting one. I've probably had bad bosses in the past ( >> > 30+ >> > years) but at the time I got on ok with them. Probably I was my own >> > worst >> > boss (when I owned company :) >> > >> > -- >> > Meski >> > >> > "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, >> > you'll >> > get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills >> > > > > > -- > Meski > > "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll > get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills >
