[la64710]

This whole model of interview is biased towards communication skills and that gets reflected in the culture of every damn company where no matter what you do it is important to be able to “talk”. Talk not in the sense of being objective but talk in the sense of being subjective , being able to influence , be liked etc etc.. it’s all understanble after all we are human too but it’s difficult for kids who grew up in the 80s and were fed with more neutral merit based and objective outlook of life.

[dasil003]

I grew up in the 80s too, and I hope by this age one would not be tethered to naive interpretations of whatever values were pitched to them as a child.

I’m not the greatest natural communicator, and I didn’t get into software to work with people, but I have come to the conclusion that there just aren’t very many roles for senior software engineers that don’t require solid communication efforts to be successful. It’s not about subjective vs objective, it’s just that most paid software positions are about solving a problem for other humans, and it’s hard to get it right if you aren’t well practiced in both listening and discussing their needs interactively. The user will never understand the reasoning for the technical choices, so the empathy must flow the other way.

[la64710]

Listening I understand , but enjoying the privilege of talking freely (which only a certain type of people have) and thereby becoming the thought leaders of an organization and determining what everyone should like and what they should not - I think is what does a disservice to the organization in the long run but the interviews and internal mechanisms are biased towards such people.

[rmbyrro]

Aren't you pointing out how the average human is?

I mean, we are a heavily communicative species. The most of all species by a very, very large margin...

[la64710]

True and that is why the Tower of Babel was built and remove objectivity.