Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rjd 4746 days ago
I got off to a real bad footing in a job interview using a questions like that once. With a guy looking for a 'right' answer, and it didn't go down well when I challenged his assumption.

He asked how many plumbers worked in the city, to which I replied you could check the industry registry for qualified plumbers, you can probably filter them out by city. There was silence then I had the question clarified to how many 'plumbing businesses' where there not individual plumbers.

To which I replied you could get the company registrar office but it was impossible to calculate as so many plumbers work full time while also holding businesses of there own as free agents. A very unimpressed look came across the guys face and I was told there is a very simple way to find out and asked to try again.

I sat in silence for a 30 seconds or so trying to think of something that would be more thorough than the registry offices, I think offered a few alternatives like tax department records, government statistics office. All things I could think of that would keep fine grained data. But I could see the guy growing impatient with me so I stared at him and asked him what a better metric was than what I had offered.

After a few moments I was told the correct answer was to check the phone book, any practicing plumber business would be listed.

Startled but what seemed like a completely faulty answer I pointed out what seemed obvious to me... not every business needs to have a public listing... some deal directly as sub contractors ... some could be umbrella companies for subbies ... again some are free agents... some might use unlisted cellphones... not everyone is a legal company, not all plumbers where qualified. It was a terrible way to get a dataset you could rely on.

Angry swept across the guys face and I was told sternly I was wrong the data was perfectly suitable, onto the next question... which was all down hill from there as he didn't want to hear my answers, didn't challenge me back, just rip through the rest.

To this day I laugh when ever I think back to that interview. It was probably the most uncomfortable interview I've ever been in.

2 comments

You must not question the data. The phone book is data, and is therefore perfect. Imagine if people started questioning data...
So, is Google admitting the questions are hopeless, or are they saying that their interviewer's reactions to the answers to those questions are hopeless?

Because fixing interviews is harder than just working out hwat questions to ask.

I dunno about google, but my experience was more copy cat behavior by someone that didn't get the purpose of it I think... maybe I was to blame as well as I pushed back expecting to be challenged more.. not just told I was wrong.

It ended up worse then useless for both of us involved.

Dodged a bullet, anyone can see your answers were at least a good as the phone book one. Nothing worse than a managers who relies on authority to backup their flawed decisions just to spare their own ego. Sounds like a toxic org culture