One of the way that I have been able to secure employment time and again, is to attach "sterlized" copies of pervious work. Tiger Strikes, Firewall projects etc. Then I expect a clued manager to fire off a volley of questions at me. If I don't get such an interview, I seriously question working for the company. It's always served me well. Daren John wrote: > > Andy: > > Your methodology works in the programming/development field where someone > can walk in with 100,000 lines of code and show you a tangible > product/project. > > Networking is a bit difficult unless you're going to throw potential > candidates into a working lab. Not likely. > > In my years of experience I have found that the best way to ferret out the > true from the untrue is to have a battery of questions that are structured > in such a way as to illicit an expert, a mid-level and a novice response. > (This is done in person, and is never written.) > > For example: In NT you get a "blue screen". What are the potential problems > and how do you resolve it. Each level candidate will have a response > appropriate to their experience. The questionnaire should anticipate what > the answers are, and grade the candidate's response accordingly. This way > even a non-technical person can pre-screen. > > Those who past muster at this level make it to the next round. > > (The only drawback to this method is that it means you commit staff each > time you interview, and you must be wary of the creative recruiter who snags > a copy of the questionnaire to "prep" his candidates..it has happens :) > > Such a tool is great because many engineers do NOT know how to interview, > and this gives them a guideline. > > I have interviewed many, many engineers using this method, and rarely does > this evaluation not paint an accurate picture. > > Enough, > > Daren John
