Comment by bunderbunder | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bunderbunder | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

When I ask questions like this in interviews, I am never expecting the interviewee to give the correct answer. In fact, if they could rattle it off right away it would be disappointing, and mean I'd have to try and figure out some other question I don't think they know the answer to.

The point of such questions is to test the person's problem-solving skills. What's being observed is how they go about trying to crack open the problem. As well as how they react to being thrown a curveball - do they roll up their sleeves and get to work, or do they stammer and freeze up under the pressure?

Secondarily, their working knowledge is also being tested, since if they pass the first two parts of the test then they should end up demonstrating some of that knowledge as they start working their way into the problem.

But I'm not interested in sitting around waiting for a correct solution. Just waiting long enough to get an answer to the questions I had. None of which are the same as the question I asked.

do they roll up their sleeves and get to work, or do they stammer and freeze up under the pressure?

Which, BTW, correlates more with whether they had seen that particular problem or not before (i.e. had subjected themselves to the tedious and soul-crushing task of prepping for interviews like this) than with any "intrinsic" problem-solving ability.

Perhaps. Though in my experience it seems to correlate better with whether someone enjoys a good brain-bender or not. Frankly, I'd prefer not to hire the kind of person who spends time doing cram sessions on compendiums of interview questions. If I get the impression that they're mostly operating on that particular kind of book smarts rather than working knowledge, then they're probably going to lose out to someone who didn't give me that impression.

And yeah, I am starting to think that problem-solving ability is at least somewhat intrinsic, to the extent that it has more to do with a person's temperament than anything else. It's certainly not the kind of thing I've ever seen much success in training someone to do. It seems to be the difference between initially reacting with, "Hmm, that's funny, I wonder why that happened," and "Ughh no no how do I make it stop!?"

If it were workable, I think a stellar interview question might be, "Do you find jigsaw puzzles more enjoyable with or without a picture?"

Why would that be such a great interview question? Because it's impossible to determine a correct answer?

Because the answer might give some insight into a person's personality. Which is a the main thing a good interview is supposed to try and probe. If you make it that far then they should already have good reason to believe you've got the necessary skills.

So, in a sense, you're right. It's a good question because their is no correct answer. An interviewer who's asking many questions that have correct answers is an interviewer who didn't exercise due diligence during the pre-interview process.

The point of such questions is to test the person's problem-solving skills.

As if you're qualified to tell one way or another.

As if you're qualified to tell one way or another.

I hope you appreciate the irony of you sarcasm.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com