[dominotw]

>shouldn't interviews be about a conversation?

sounds wrong to hire the best conversationalist. I know many people who are all talk and no substance.

>an you imagine interviewing medical doctors the same way we interview in the tech industry

they are already certified by the boards. Computer science degree is not equivalent to medical board certificate.

[vonmoltke]

> sounds wrong to hire the best conversationalist. I know many people who are all talk and no substance.

Talk only goes so far. It isn't hard to make a poseur look like an idiot if you know what you are doing. A "Five Whys"-style line of questions, for example, will blow up most fakers in a few minutes. After all, how do you know these people are all talk? Is their talk really convincing to a technologist or does it just dazzle non-technical people?

> they are already certified by the boards. Computer science degree is not equivalent to medical board certificate.

People like to overstate the power and effectiveness of medical licensing boards. Very few doctors have to prove anything after their residency. All they need to do is complete continuing education requirements (which, in many cases, are pretty fluffy). That's for the most regulated of the regulated professions, too. Lawyers, accountants, engineers, and others have basically one major hurdle to jump, after which it's easy to remain current by the letter of the law.

[shklnrj]

Of course it would start with a conversation and then move on to the implementation where the ones with knowledge would shine through. Having the same start line as someone fresh out of college does not give an experienced person, the chance to demonstrate his abilities. And also after some time it can become boring to brush up the same old algorithm style questions in my opinion.