As a senior developer, it's my responsibility to help the business with hiring. That includes interviews with technically my new boss.
Right now, my job is looking for a Director of Frontend (Weird title since technically we're Full-Stack. But the industry as a whole is torn between what the heck Frontend even means).
I don't have to remind people - Tech interviews are broken. We force an introvert to sit in a room full of strangers and demand they get comfortable - fast. Then force them to answer questions on the spot while 6 other sets of eyes judge them.
There are hundreds of books on how to ACE the tech interview for applicants. But what about the interviewer - the person on the other side of the table?
Why is the applicant required to come up with great stories?
As we look for a Director of Frontend (Again weird title), how do I make this a better experience? How can I elicit the questions that help the business know that this application is an excellent fit? How do I drill through the rote responses and drill into the heart of the person's core? How do I break this cycle of interview abuse? And how do I do this, all within an hour?
I struggled to find a good book to create better tech interviews. There wasn't any.
But - I was recommended the book "Talk to Me" by Dean Nelson.
(image from https://deannelson.net/)
This resource was recommended by the Rands Leadership Slack group.
"Talk to Me" Book Summary
Included are my takeaways from the book.
If you're reading this as a future applicant to the Director of Frontend, congrats on doing your homework on me.
The Goal of an Interview
An interview is a conversation, not an interrogation. It’s about gaining understanding. The interview is not about you, the person. Take your ego out of it. There are no winners or losers.
It's also a job. Doctors, Lawyers, Social Workers, Human Resources all have people they like talking to, and people they don't. Regardless of how you feel, you’re a professional. You have to appear impartial. Let the person speak without your correction or judgment or criticism.
Craft your interview through the prism of “What does Dave need to know here?" Focusing on someone in the audience helps you get your ego out of the way and put the emphasis back on the person you’re talking to.
It's all about gathering information.
The Type of Questions to ask
The best questions are the open-ended ones, where the source has a chance to explain something, and even provide an anecdote to illustrate it.
Lead the conversation with specifics about them. Do your homework. Avoid vagueness.
A prime example of bad questions is during an Olympic event, where an athlete just completed something that they've been obsessing about for the last four years of their lives, and the interviewer asks, “What was it like to be out here?” It's vague. That results in canned answers like "Nothing is like being there".
Instead, get specific. “How you were able to focus after that false start?” Or "How did this victory or loss rank with other wins and losses in your career?"
A question like "What was it like being on the Arctic Circle?" may result in a single-word answer: "Cold". Two better questions would be “What was the most difficult part about being there?” Or, “What was the most fun part about being there?”
Doing your homework allows you to ask questions that begin with “Why” or “How,” which are guaranteed to get you further than “When”, “What”, “Who” or “Where.”
Open-ended Questions for Inspiration
What first got you interested in...”
This is a "legacy"-type of question.
Pointing out their legacy and asking sources how they want to be remembered. This opens up an opportunity for them to tell you what is important.
A great example of a "legacy" question is when President Clinton went on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. Wallace asks Clinton to talk more about what is motivating him in his charitable work.
WALLACE: Mr. President... In a recent issue of the New Yorker you say, quote, “I’m sixty years old and I damn near died, and I’m worried about how many lives I can save before I do die.” Is that what drives you in your effort to help in these developing countries?
"What do you make of..."
This gives you a chance to bring up an issue that your source can expound on.
Using another example of President Clinton and Wallace:
WALLACE: When you look at the $3 billion from Branson, plus the billions that Bill Gates is giving in his own program, and now Warren Buffett, what do you make of this new age of philanthropy?
"Help me understand...”
This puts your source in the role of an expert and they can elaborate on the topic.
You have said...”
This requires you to know your source's background. Within the tech interview context, it could be something in their cover letter or referencing a statement from a prior interview.
"Well is it more like this or is it like this?"
Ira Glass of This American Life uses this prompt to force the interview to go somewhere. They either bat away your theory or go in another direction.
A variant of that is:
“How did you think it was going to work out before it happened? And then how did it really work out?” Glass says that it always yields two stories in response. “You get ’Here’s how I thought it would go,’ which is one story. And then ’Here’s how the reality is different than the dream of that.’
Excuse me?
This is a common shorthand means to ask for more details. It looks unnatural, but you'll see this a lot in talk show interviews.
"What would you take if you..."
The cliché “What would you want with you if you were stranded on a desert island?” or “What would you grab if you had to evacuate your home quickly?”
The Jeopardy! question
It's been typically used in job interviews. It helps identify what topics are important to the source. It’s “If you were a contestant on Jeopardy!, in what category would you excel?”
How would your life have been different... ?”
It makes the source consider alternatives to how his or her life turned out. It reveals a lot about the person’s personality and interests.
What is your favorite unimportant thing to do?”
This gets your source evaluating several things at once, and it often creates something personal and revealing.
Responding with body language
- Eye contact matters.
- The occasional “Mm-hmms” and “Uh-huh” are encouragements for your source to keep going. Be mindful if they do not come across as 'interruptions'.
- If you you don’t understand what is being said, or you think the source has gone on way too long, use your hands. A shoulder-level, non-threatening "Hold on".
- Nod to keep the person going.
- Look quizzical if you don’t understand or don’t believe what you’re hearing.
- Raise your eyebrows if you are surprised or incredulous.
- Shake your head if you’re just not buying it, or you’re amazed.
Being flexible
The author shares a story about how he went to a convention where the speaker of the final gathering was Tony Campolo. He didn't show, and the organizers played dumb, not knowing why the switch occurred. Conveniently, his next assignment was to do a separate story on Tony Campolo involving humanitarian efforts for the people of Haiti.
When the author arrived for the interview, before the small talk, Tony said “I’ll bet you’re here to find out from me why I got disinvited from that big convention in Washington, D.C.”
Tough Questions, not Gotchas
The difficult questions are the ones where you are getting to the heart of the matter. Tough questions don’t have to be mean, embarrassing, inappropriate, or invade anyone’s privacy. The goal is to break them out of their rote responses, giving you some fresh insight, and get to the heart of what is going on.
The goal isn’t to have a “gotcha” moment. A phrase used in journalism is "heat for heat’s sake or heat for light’s sake". The former is just to rile people up. The latter is to bring clarity/understanding to a situation.
You can ask them a few ways:
- Ease into it. The author recommends putting tough questions about two-thirds of the way into the interview when there's been enough rapport and the person trues you.
- They can be gently introduced with a phrase like “Help me understand something.”
- “So-and-so said it happened this way, but you say it happened that way. Can you see how this is confusing?”
- I apologize if this next question will sound offensive to you,”
Dealing with challenging Interviewers
The goal of a interview is to reveal the truth.
You don’t have to respond positively or negatively. Your obligation is to remain neutral. You can challenge unsavory statements if it feels relevant.
Interviews should not devolve into shouting matches. People often don't change their behavior because they lost an argument with you. It is always better to ask, listen, respond, guide, ask differently, and probe.
Control is a dynamic involved in virtually every interview, and you must be aware of who has it at all times. Strong personalities or "Media savvy" folks may try to wrest control from you.
Silence is one of the ways to retain control. Silence feels uncomfortable. But your source might be thinking. Or they're hoping you would change the subject.
The author shares a story where a reporter sat with a investigator. For a long period of time, nothing was said. After a long time, the investigator opens up on their own. The reporter later recounted, "I judged right away that he was nervous. I didn’t want to spook him, so I figured he would talk when he was ready."
Wrapping up the Interview
Lead the conversation to the finish line. Giving them a “I have just two more questions.” will let the source knows that you're reaching a conclusion. When I’m done I say something along the lines of “Thank you so much for taking the time!”
Final Takeaways
The takeaways shared are focusing on the interview portion. The book covers the full scope of journalism, including researching, note-taking and follow-ups.
The main takeaway is as it's our obligation as a interviewer to help the source navigate, pull on interesting threads and let them speak on it. Ask the tough questions, but frame it with curiosity.
If you have book recommendations to improve the tech interview, I'd love to hear it in the comments!
Top comments (0)