| So, I have been giving this a bit of thought, when I interview badly (and I have a zillion times), it's mostly because I'm not used to vocalising my thoughts whilst I work. That is
interviewer: Tell me what your next step is in solving this problem
me: <radio silence> The problem is two things, I, as an engineer, barely ever talk to people as I am solving whatever it is I am doing, so the interview is a completely artificial environment that I am not equipped for (although, as I interview more I get back into the groove and by the third or fourth interview I am able to anticipate the questions and produce a mechanical answer that satisfies the interviewer) The second part of the problem is obvious, the interviewer has no clue why I cannot answer the question, so can only assume it's a lack of skills on my part. Interviews are an artificial environment, there's no way an interviewer can actually tell from the interview whether the person in front of them is a good engineer or not. When I have got a few interviews under my belt, I am fluent, and able to demonstrate my theory knowledge clearly. Have my skills changed? Not really, my interview skills for sure, but my engineering skills? Interviewers often try to counter this by searching for some obscure factoid within the technology and wondering why people being interviewed don't know it (curiously there's the other problem here where interviewers themselves have an erroneous understanding of the technology and this leads to false negatives). |