[lj3]

> found it best to have a guided interview about the candidate's work experience and interesting problems that she/he solved.

This. I advocate this method of interviewing here in the states every chance I get. The most common form of push back I get is from hiring managers terrified of being hoodwinked into making a bad hire. It's like they don't trust their own judgement enough to be able to tell apart those who know what they're talking about from those who just talk a good game.

> I'm always surprised how many candidates cannot even point to one problem they worked on they found interesting or one solution that they're proud of

Junior engineers, I assume? I had problems with those questions when I first started out. It's hard to say with a straight face that the thing I was most proud of at that point in my career was creating a very simple templating system in PHP. Of course, the interviewers rolling their eyes and saying 'is that all?' didn't help.

[jonasvp]

> It's like they don't trust their own judgement enough to be able to tell apart those who know what they're talking about from those who just talk a good game.

Which is usually the case in larger companies, I assume. The person doing the hiring in that case is far removed from the people and work actually connected with the candidate.

> Junior engineers, I assume?

You're right, that's surely part of it. Not only, however - sometimes you get the feeling that work is something that happens to people, not something they seek out and try to get better at. Which for many positions is completely fine.

[_pmf_]

> Of course, the interviewers rolling their eyes and saying 'is that all?' didn't help.

That says a lot about their maturity, not yours.