The problem is with the fact that most people involved with the interview processes have no technical background. There are of course the exceptions from the successful companies but consider all the recruiters, HR and managers , especially old school, who cannot read one line of code and they are tasked to evaluate people on technology and potential.
When I ran the hiring processes with very high success ration, I mostly focused on the potential of the candidate. If there is potential then this person is a goldmine. I would also try to focus on extrapolating the potential even if the candidate was insecure or didn't evaluate himself well and I would try to raise his confidence in the interview.
It is the job of the experienced person to navigate through the background of the candidate because if the candidate is inexperienced then he doesn't really know what is relevant. Even experienced candidates don't know because often the descriptions are just a copy. But to do this, the interviewer needs to know and understand on a technical level what the role requires.
Senior DevOps Engineer with 8.5+ years of experience. Otherwise an avid artist, reader, cinephile & football fan. Looking forward to connecting with everyone :)
Brilliantly put Alex, couldn't be more concise than this!
In India, the part of non-technical people evaluating prospective candidates on technology is definitely true. For e.g: Most of them wouldn't be aware of what's the difference between AWS / GCP / Azure but ramble about it like they invented it.
My idea is to determine a candidate's logical thinking by asking them real-world scenario problems (to the best extent possible) and discuss what matters to them, their career motivation & their interest levels in the role they're applying (Good ones will usually be curious)
PS: I agree behavioral answers can be faked but if you ask the appropriate questions, people eventually spill enough information to make a decision.
You wrote the most important parts in your PS. The only requirement is that people know what are the appropriate questions and in our industry most don't, so we fabricate a ton of adjustment processes to in theory compensate but in practice makes things worse.
And it is not only India. There are basic indications to identify when things are wrong.
Senior DevOps Engineer with 8.5+ years of experience. Otherwise an avid artist, reader, cinephile & football fan. Looking forward to connecting with everyone :)
I believe in both cases, the more clear we're in our requirements as to what kind of role do we want / what type of person we'd like to hire - the smoother the process becomes.
It'll be tedious especially if it takes longer than expected but the end result will surely be satisfying.
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.
The problem is with the fact that most people involved with the interview processes have no technical background. There are of course the exceptions from the successful companies but consider all the recruiters, HR and managers , especially old school, who cannot read one line of code and they are tasked to evaluate people on technology and potential.
When I ran the hiring processes with very high success ration, I mostly focused on the potential of the candidate. If there is potential then this person is a goldmine. I would also try to focus on extrapolating the potential even if the candidate was insecure or didn't evaluate himself well and I would try to raise his confidence in the interview.
It is the job of the experienced person to navigate through the background of the candidate because if the candidate is inexperienced then he doesn't really know what is relevant. Even experienced candidates don't know because often the descriptions are just a copy. But to do this, the interviewer needs to know and understand on a technical level what the role requires.
Brilliantly put Alex, couldn't be more concise than this!
In India, the part of non-technical people evaluating prospective candidates on technology is definitely true. For e.g: Most of them wouldn't be aware of what's the difference between AWS / GCP / Azure but ramble about it like they invented it.
My idea is to determine a candidate's logical thinking by asking them real-world scenario problems (to the best extent possible) and discuss what matters to them, their career motivation & their interest levels in the role they're applying (Good ones will usually be curious)
PS: I agree behavioral answers can be faked but if you ask the appropriate questions, people eventually spill enough information to make a decision.
You wrote the most important parts in your PS. The only requirement is that people know what are the appropriate questions and in our industry most don't, so we fabricate a ton of adjustment processes to in theory compensate but in practice makes things worse.
And it is not only India. There are basic indications to identify when things are wrong.
I believe in both cases, the more clear we're in our requirements as to what kind of role do we want / what type of person we'd like to hire - the smoother the process becomes.
It'll be tedious especially if it takes longer than expected but the end result will surely be satisfying.