[zippergz]

Dismissing a company because one engineer there is bad at interviewing seems potentially short-sighted. First, you're getting a single data point. And second, how the person operates in interviews quite likely has nothing to do with how he or she is to work with on projects.

Obviously it's your prerogative to decide where to work. But walking away because you didn't like a single interview is a little bit petty.

[blablablame]

If the only look into a company is that tech interview, and he or she will be someone you will have to work with on a day to day basis, and s/he is someone that just flat out refuses to accept that maybe his answer isn't the right one, would you want to work with someone like this 8 hours a day?

To be fair, I might have been that guy 10 years ago, and I was probably quite an annoying know it all co-worker then, but now, after close to 20 years in the industry, having worked in software that is used by millions, being a referenced author, honestly, no, I refuse outright to deal with bullshit like this. I don't expect everyone to think what I say is right (because it isn't) but to just dismiss it since it isn't THEIR answer, is a RED flag for me and I would prefer not to work there, no matter the offer.

[dragonwriter]

> Dismissing a company because one engineer there is bad at interviewing seems potentially short-sighted.

I keep hearing about a shortage of quality talent in the industry. Given that, I would expect employers to pay particular attention to putting their best foot forward in interviews -- since interviews work in both directions.

One that fails to do so -- or whose best foot is off-putting -- is revealing that their attitude toward potential hires and/or their ability to offer a good working environment is poor.

People talk about how a bad hire is a significant cost for employers, but taking a bad job can be a much bigger cost for the employee than a single bad hire is for an employer, and quite worth avoiding.

[wolfgke]

> Given that, I would expect employers to pay particular attention to putting their best foot forward in interviews

"Best" (in doing interviews) is not a criterion that lies on an ordinal scale, but is a multicriterial property.

[wtracy]

If the interviewer is just another rank-and-file engineer rather than a manager, he/she may not be motivated to see someone get hired.

[dblohm7]

Dismissing a company because one engineer there is bad at interviewing seems potentially short-sighted.

One could swap "a company" and "one engineer there" and still have a perfectly valid argument.

[Scarblac]

On the other hand, that's what the interview process is for, right? What other information do you have except what you see in the interview?