| > I guarantee you there is no shadow council trying to figure out how to hire "busywork" worker bees. I didn't say that. I said that this style of interview was designed to hire pluggable cogs. As others have noted, that was the correct move for Big Tech and was cargo culted into a bunch of other companies that didn't know why their interviews were shaped the way they were. > there would be "out of the box thinkers" who would go against your ideas and cause dissent. At that point, guess what? You're going to figure out how to hire compliant people who will execute on your strategy. In answer to your original question: yes, I'm actively involved in hiring at a 100+ person engineering org that hires this way. And no, we're not looking to figure out how to hire compliant people, we're hiring engineers who will push back and do what works well, not just act because an executive says so. > You have now excluded amazing engineers who suck at talking about themselves in interviews. They may be great collaborators and communicators, but freeze up selling themselves in an interview. Only if you suck at making people comfortable and at understanding different (potentially awkward) communication styles. You don't have to discriminate against people for being awkward, that's a choice you can make. You can instead give them enough space to find their train of thought and pursue it, and it does work—I recently sat in on an interview like that with someone who fits your description exactly, and we strongly recommended him. |