One of the most salient features of our Tech Hiring culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted.
If I were you, I would do a cost/benefits analysis of what it has meant for you to apply at Google.
Cost: you destroyed your self-confidence
Cost: you spent a shitty day the first time
Cost: you spent 300 hours working on learning how to pass a job interview. Assuming that could have earnt $200 an hour, that's a $60.000 investment. I hope you don't make fun of people who go to expansive colleges.
Benefit: you learnt a lots of things
Cost: most of them were not really needed for your actual job
Cost: you applied once again, and felt shitty being rejected again - don't lie
The next time you find someone praising Google's interview process, you can ask him this brain teaser:
Google has earned a lot of respect for its achievements in the early 2000s. Since then however, there have been an impressive track record of projects that go nowhere. Can you estimate how many days of talented programmers have been wasted in the process? Given that programmers have so much leverage in a world where their skills are in high demand, can you give a rough estimate of the opportunity cost that this waste represent?
Now if you actually ask yourself this tough brainteaser, good news, you will feel instantly smarter for having asked such a tough question and let the other guy do all the job.
Google’s finding, short and simple: interviews are a terrible predictor of [job] performance.
“Many managers, recruiters and HR staffers think they have a special ability to sniff out talent. They’re wrong. It is a complete random mess. We found a zero relationship.”
On the hiring side, we found that brainteasers are a complete waste of time. How many golf balls can you fit into an airplane? How many gas stations in Manhattan? A complete waste of time. They don’t predict anything. They serve primarily to make the interviewer feel smart.
Years ago, we did a study to determine whether anyone at Google is particularly good at hiring. We looked at tens of thousands of interviews, and everyone who had done the interviews and what they scored the candidate, and how that person ultimately performed in their job. We found zero relationship. It’s a complete random mess.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Sorry to be blunt but I find this insane.
If I were you, I would do a cost/benefits analysis of what it has meant for you to apply at Google.
The next time you find someone praising Google's interview process, you can ask him this brain teaser:
Now if you actually ask yourself this tough brainteaser, good news, you will feel instantly smarter for having asked such a tough question and let the other guy do all the job.
Don't take it from me. Laszlo Bock, former head of Google HR, said this