Re: Half Day Interview

[Lynn Gold <figmo -at- RAHUL -dot- NET>]

Elna Tymes wrote:
>
>Michael Clark wrote:
>>
>> A potential employer of mine said they would like me to spend "at least
>> a half a day" with them for an interview.
>>
>> What in the world would we do over a half day?! Should I prepare for it
>> any any differently than I would other interviews?
>
>In these days of team approaches to creating products (and documentation
>is part of a product), chances are very good that you'll be spending
>that half day being interviewed by several members of the development
>team, and possibly an internal 'client' or two. They'll be looking for
>not just how you write, but how you collect information, what you do
>with changing deadlines and/or project definitions, how you handle
>reviews of your material, and general people skills.

I've had many half-day and nearly full-day interviews.  This usually means
you'll be meeting with members of the team on an individual basis.  A good
question to ask is if lunch is involved (you often get a free lunch in
these; not a bad deal! :-) ).  I've also been involved in the interviewing
process.

After you go through these interviews, the folks who interview you compare
notes.  They look for the following traits:

. Was this person consistent in each interview?
. Does the candidate match the resume?  Were there any obvious SNAFUs on
  the interviewee's end?
. Can I work with this person?
. How do I think this person will fit into our environment?  Will the
  interviewee be happy enough to stick around for a few years?

Here are some samples of how I've seen people "pass" and "fail" interviews:

. Was this person consistent in each interview?

FAILED:  The candidate claimed to be a tech writer and had come with an
attache case, but when I asked to see his portfolio of writing samples, he
said he didn't have one.  When another interviewer asked the same question,
he pulled out his portfolio of illustrations.  His story of why he left his
last job changed for each interviewer.

PASSED:  The candidate's answers were consistent between interviewees
without seeming canned.  In a good interview, the candidate gives each
interviewee a different angle of the same picture.

. Does the candidate match the resume?  Were there any obvious SNAFUs on
  the interviewee's end?

FAILED:  The candidate claimed to know FrameMaker.  In questioning, it
turned out he'd only used it for half an hour on a Mac at a trade show.

Another candidate failed because she claimed to know UNIX yet VEHEMENTLY
insisted the UNIX command to get a listing of one's files was "ps" and not
"ls".

PASSED:  The candidate, when asked for the name of the UNIX command to get
a listing of one's files said, "I don't know."  She then pointed out she'd
never claimed to have used UNIX in the first place.  It also became obvious
from the way she talked she could pick it up in a week.

. Can I work with this person?

FAILED:  The candidate was asked, "What do you do when you've got a
developer who won't return feedback on time?"  His reply: "Why, I'd send
e-mail to him and his manager and my manager, and THAT would take care of
it, all right!"

PASSED:  The candidate, when asked the same question, told stories of
finding workarounds, getting to know the people who sat near the developer,
bribing with chocolate, and other more creative and pleasant solutions.

. How do I think this person will fit into our environment?  Will the
  interviewee be happy enough to stick around for a few years?

This one's the hardest one to pass because every company is different.
I've failed many an interview where I was otherwise qualified because I
didn't "fit in."  You can "fail" (I use the quotes intentionally --
"failing" this part doesn't mean you're a bad candidate OR a bad
interviewee) for any of the following reasons and more:

. You're a morning person, and the team consists of night-owls.
. You're a night-owls, and the team consists of morning people.
. You look too conventional.
. You look too unconventional.
. They want someone who's more direct and outspoken and isn't afraid to
  lock horns with developers.
. They want someone who appears meek and will do whatever the developers
  ask.
. They want someone who will stay for 40 hours, stick exclusively to their
  tasks, and go home.
. They want someone who will work as many hours as necessary and who will
  do whatever they feel needs to be done.

Note that these traits are opposites; I've been in all these situations and
have seen (on both sides) people pass and fail based on these traits.

FAILED:  The candidate, when asked why she'd left her previous employers,
said, "it was just the right time" or "I wanted something new."  Upon
comparing notes, we realized she'd had a pattern of sticking around for a
year, then leaving because she was "bored."

PASSED:  The candidate "clicked" with all the interviewees.

Note that you can pass all these and STILL not get hired.  I once had an
interview where I was a "very good" candidate, but someone who was
absolutely PERFECT for the job showed up.  In another case, I was beaten
out by someone with a Master's degree who'd done something similar in her
previous job (I only have a Bachelor's degree).

>I know that some companies (Sun and Hewlett Packard come to mind)
>routinely pass a candidate through the team approach to interviewing.
>When Apple does team interviews, each person emails the rest immediately
>following his/her interview with the candidate, so that subsequent team
>members can follow up on things raised earlier.

There's also the "gang" interview, where you're put in a room with the team
and they all throw questions at you at once.  This can be okay, or it can
be downright grueling.  The advantage to this type of interview is they get
to see the candidate interact with the whole team.  If everyone is going to
"click," you'll know it and FAST.  The disadvantages to this type of
interview are the candidate can't ask probing questions, and the
interviewees have to watch what they say about the company.

I've participated in both types of interview on both ends, and overall I
prefer the one-on-one approach with perhaps a group lunch in the middle.
As a candidate, this gives me a chance to find out what it's REALLY like in
the company, and as an interviewer, it gives me a chance to better evaluate
the candidate.

--Lynn

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html