My Interview Questions for Potential Employers
runtime-era.com
runtime-era.com
Will i have the freedom to use whatever OS and software i want?
If the answer to this is anything other than Yes, i dont take the gig. Give me the tools to do my job and trust me to do it, i'll even bring my own tools, i like a mac and sublime. I once had a potential employer tell me that i was only allowed to use windows, only allowed to use eclipse and i'd be issued an MSDN license even though they admitted it wasnt relevant to me, because that was standard IT policy. Sorry, no thanks.
Is the office a relaxed environment?
I can usually answer this myself if i'm doing a face to face just by looking at how people are dressed and such, but a lot of the time i have a phone interview first, and then i ask this. I absolutely will not work anywhere where i cant wear jeans and a t-shirt and if i walk in at 9.08am and you're going to moan at me for it, no thanks. I've also seen places where they dont allow employees to leave the building except at pre-defined lunch and break times, again, no deal.
While these might seem petty to some people, to me they're indicative of an overall culture of not trusting employees and excessive micromanagement and i have the luxury of totally avoiding places like that, so i'm going to.
A 4TB hard drive now lists for $150. This means that 50MB costs a fraction of a penny, and the price is dropping.
Every second that a minimum-wage employee spends deleting emails to get down to that low a quota is a flagrant waste of money. The higher-paid the employee, the more flagrant the waste.
This is seriously like paying your employees to collect individual pieces of pine straw so you can save money on landscaping.
Not to mention the fact that those emails probably contain data that's worth more than their storage cost, especially if they're searchable.
Indeed. Hence the question is a useful filter, to identify and avoid companies who have incredibly outdated email systems and technology policies. They won't be leading-edge in anything else either.
Similar: "What does your company use for email? Lotus Notes?" (Unless you're applying to IBM itself.)
Indeed; I learned EMACS at an impressionable age, so that made it simple (one program, which I could supply my own licensed copy back when that was necessary). Otherwise, no deal, that level of inflexibility is beyond the pale.
Another aspect of "relaxed" is can you choose your own username and email address (I've used the same one since 1978 (sic))? I can think of only one company I worked at where that was both an issue and it was really good to work for.
Some of the responsibility of finding a "good" work environment lies on the employee too. If you go into the process expecting to find a "perfect" employer you're going to be disappointed. This is true in professional software environments just like it is in life: everyone has different values, and if you want to be happy you need to be willing to compromise a little.
I'm not saying that there aren't objectively "bad" professional cultures out there, but if you put your requirements on a big bullet list like this you're going to be ruling out a bunch of objectively "good" ones too.
That one exception was a very small startup ... and that inflexibility was a sign of internal issues that helped kill it, just not ones that got in the way of if being good for the programmers, until it went under of course.
Some of us actually enjoy dressing like a grownup.
It's about signaling. Sure, some people are able to overcome those filters through outstanding performance elsewhere, but why not give yourself every advantage possible? Why not strive to be the best version of yourself?
In my case, I design things for a living. What does it say about me if I didn't care about my personal appearance? "I care deeply about how things work and look. Yeah, but I couldn't be bothered to put on pants or a clean shirt today"
But to your point, I do agree with you. Do what's comfortable for you. In my case, dressing better (something I've tried to do for the past year or so, after several years of hoodies and ill-fitting jeans) has made me a better, more confident person.
Then again, I don't like the idea of having to wear a particular set of clothes for a job. I like suits, but I'd get sick of them if I wore them every day. So, to me the fact that a company has a relaxed enough culture to allow employees to wear what they like is a very positive signal, even though I will tend to dress formally on most occasions.
I just find the "I can't be happy happy hacker unless I'm wearing a hoodie a flip flops" and "you're not a real geek unless you've got the most lustrous scraggly neckbeard" attitude kind of odd.
I think some of that might be a backlash to working in a dress-code enforced environment for a period of time. I know when I left a job years ago to go independent/freelance, I spent a significant amount of time in sweatpants (on a good day) & hoodies. A few years later, I'm happy to put on an ironed shirt, dark jeans, and nice shoes to work at the office or to go meet a client.
For me, there is something to the ritual of grooming & dress that gets me ready to take on the day like nothing else. I just wish it weren't so vilified amongst the hacker set.
[Fun side-effects: people take you more seriously, women (and men) will smile at you, you'll be in a more powerful position when negotiating, service industry workers will (generally) be more accommodating, and you'll always be ready to meet people for dinner or drinks at the drop of a hat. Try it!]
I realize that in many workplace situations it's naive to think "I should be judged on my performance and not my appearance." I just choose to work somewhere that isn't the case.
The psychological factors (e.g. dressing sharp makes you feel better) are certainly valid. If you like wearing nice clothes, by all means. If you work somewhere where your boss dresses up or wears Prada or whatever, and everyone else wears business casual, then you might want to conform a bit if you want to get ahead (or else be deliberately different, but understand the effect it will have).
But let's not pretend it has anything to do with being a "grownup".
I wear jeans, a hoodie, nice shoes, and a T-shirt to work every day. Admittedly, I'm a grad-student, but I've also done this with real employers. They're a nice pair of jeans, a nice hoodie, and a nice T-shirt. Choosing a casual style doesn't mean looking like some frumpy idiot who pulled clothes out of his bottom drawer.
Interestingly enough, this validates the parent's assertion that people judge others based on what they wear :)
Are those people autistic, or just idiots? How you dress has nothing to do with being a "grownup"? Sure it doesn't. I see people come into work wearing spiderman pyjamas every day.
I'm all for relaxed starting times, but at my current company that seems to have led to other, bad things: relaxed deadlines or other accountability.
It also sucks when something is broken at 8:00am and the guy that wrote that module (or made changes to it on Friday evening) isn't there for another hour.
Although, (ideally) any problem like that would be cost by a testing suite.
I rarely roll in to work earlier than 10 am, and that is down from about 11 am at my last job since this one has a regular 10 am scrum meeting. Yet, I wouldn't consider leaving a broken build active on Friday evening, and I'm just talking about the tip build in source code control, not a broken production system. I wouldn't even consider working for a place where developers just pushed new code willy nilly to live production systems, because that's just stupid.
Also 8am is unreasonably early :) I prefer a nice leisurely start at around 10.
If they have a formal written policy that on paper you're fired after being documented as arriving late 3 times, and traffic / weather / commute / home life means you'll be late about once a quarter that means you'll only get to work there 9 months before the sword of Damocles is permanently hanging over you. This can be kind of a hint about what the workplace environment is really like.
Another hilarious one is "can I work from home" "no" "oh cool no pager duty or on call" "well wait a second, I just meant you can't work from home 9-5". If your boss does trust you to work at 2am but not at 2pm when at home, its just kinda weird.
"Relaxed" is a lot more subjective . . .
"Since you asked me what my greatest weakness was, I think it's fair to ask: What's the worst thing about working here?"
I've only been able to ask it once, and didn't really get a good answer, but I think it has the potential to elicit some thoughtful (or telling) responses.
"I live a ways away, and to avoid rush hour won't ever be at the office before 11 AM."
"I can come in to work early, but I always have to leave by 4 PM to be home in time to pick up my children."
"I am an observant Jew and have to leave early on Fridays."
"I have life threatening condition X (asthma, diabetes, whatever) and will need accommodation Y."
And so on.
I originally got this idea from a secretary whose issue was that she was very talkative, she needs to have people she can talk to throughout the day. So she started answering the weakness question that way, and found that her bosses wouldn't complain about her talkativeness because she had already told them that up front.
Interviewer: "So, why're you looking to leave your current employer?"
Me: "Well, we were acquired a couple of years ago, and the change in culture has frustrated me a bit. I'd like to work somewhere more dynamic where there's not so much red tape and so many stakeholders to talk to about everything."
Interviewer: "OK, so do you have any questions for me?"
Me: "What's the worst thing about working here?"
Interviewer: "Well, sometimes it can feel like there's too much red tape, lots of stakeholders to consult. It would be nice to be more dynamic".
I didn't get that job.
- Sometimes, I am too nice to my customers during phone conversations, so I set mental time limits for how long a call should last
- I need to be caffeinated in order to code my best, so I always make sure to stop by the coffee shop on the way to work
Yes, it is cheesy to answer like this, but it is a cheesy question to begin with.
Well, I guess it's just a difference in philosophy. The question is more of a trap than a constructive tool. When I was trained, it was taught to me as a way to weed out people who slip up and say something stupid .. or worse.
If you're interested in the job, please understand that you're being interviewed by someone who doesn't know how to do it at this point. Don't hold it against the person. The best thing you can do is be completely conversational (and honest) in return and start driving the interview yourself.
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouths\, but something like "Foo is probably my greatest weakness; bar is my strength.What do you find you often look for in prospective coworkers? Why is that? Have you been burned before or have you worked with someone who's a complete rock star?" Etc,
If you're not interested in the job by now, this is also a great place to politely explain that the interview loop is over and thank the interviewer for his/her time . . .
* How much money is in the bank, i.e. how long can they go until the next investment round?
* Where does the company see itself in five years?
* What opportunities are there for employee development?
And please, please stop with the cultural fit! Some people do not want to have to go for beers every other night or play Xbox tournaments all Friday!
But that is cultural fit. If the culture is not doing those things.
I also ask/try to figure out in a very small startup "Can you fire people?" Because many people are bad at this and the only thing worse than a bad hire is not dealing with it in a timely fashion.
For that matter, your interview will implicitly tell you how good they might be at hiring good people.
Personally the kind of companies I prefer to work for are exactly the kind where lots of people are genuinely friends, where they do group activities (voluntary, of course) together outside of work, and where people actually like and enjoy each other.
Likewise with the company I've founded... when the day comes that we have employees and all that jazz, I do care about "cultural fit" and I would prefer to bring in people who want to be in that kind of environment. It has nothing to do with wanting to control anyone's "outside of work" life, or denying them "separation of work and personal", it's just that it's more fun to work in that kind of environment and also, IMO, more productive.
None of this implies that we would ever demand that someone sacrifice elements of their personal life in favour of doing things with co-workers, of course. And we would not be doing group events where participation is mandatory or where you would be "dinged" for choosing not to go. It's just that I like working in a very collegial, friendly, inviting culture where people genuinely enjoy each other.
When the day came when I had to hire a few people, I didn't want to hurt my social relationship with friends in case the business turned south so I hired people a bit more removed from me socially. It's hard enough to think about firing one of them (what will they do afterwards? will they land on their feet elsewhere?), but it would be nearly impossible to fire a friend for poor performance or for anything that isn't a crime.
... and possibly destroy your business. It's hard enough to fire a person, but now imagine having to fire someone you spend your off-hours with. Entangling work and personal life basically clouds your ability to view people objectively.
"work is just how you support the enjoyable parts of your life"
That's not what I'm saying. When you entangle work and personal life, you make it harder for yourself to make the hard decisions.
On a more serious note, I feel that the Dilbertization of the workspace is a problem, on both sides (employer/employee). It's essentially the replacement of idealism with cynicism, and a bad sign overall.
I've worked in places where the answer there would have been "no, never, and we don't eat lunch together either" and really didn't enjoy it.
However, I disagree about "cultural fit". I feel like being on board with the values and practices of a company are important. Beers and ping-pong aren't all there is to company culture.
Is there any way to verify this information? Anyone can say anything, and even if they show you the bank balance you don't know the expenses etc
only applicable for public companies or those with enough shareholders that they have to issue public reports. For small startups it doesn't apply.
FYI: Just did the biannual report for NY state (for a small partnership) -- they don't ask for income; they just want a statement of ownership
Maybe you're not the type to hang out outside work, you don't have time, whatever. But how well are we going to get along for the 8 hours a day we spend together?
Why and when did the last 3 people who left your group, leave?
The answer tells you volumes of useful information. It gets at what organizational turnover is, what people are unhappy about, and something about how much blame there is. Furthermore the question is so specific and unexpected that you sometimes get startlingly honest answers.
Try instead:
What was the last thing Potential Co. did to invest in your professional development?
What would you most like to improve about the team's process and workflow?
What was the last thing you did together as a team outside of work?
A couple of others that usually yield interesting results:
What's the most challenging thing about working at Potential Co?
If you could reverse a single technical decision affecting your product, what would it be?
------ Source:
"The only worse thing to training employees and losing them is not training them and keeping them". -- Zig Ziglar
-Do you do performance evaluations / raises?
-Do you block any part of the internet?
-Do you allow working remotely?
-Do you have a sane sick day policy?
-What kind of basic hours per week do you expect?
Owners/management say things like "we're small so we don't have a set vacation policy." Which sounds cool and works out fine until Willy starts coming in at 11 am and leaving at 3 pm and you wonder why you're stuck at the office on a holiday.
IMO It's much better to have set policies so everyone knows where they stand. Another option is to find a company that doesn't hire/tolerate those types of Willys, but that's difficult to know beforehand.
"-Do you do performance evaluations / raises?"
Yes, we do performance evaluations and raises. (We haven't actually issued a raise yet, but there is a plan at one point in the future)
"-Do you block any part of the internet?"
Not to my knowledge (We do block parts of the internet, such as porn websites, but we don't expect you to attempt to go to any of those blocked sites)
"-Do you allow working remotely?"
Yes (but it looks really bad and you will be judged negatively)
"-Do you have a sane sick day policy?"
Yes (for certain definitions of sane)
"-What kind of basic hours per week do you expect?"
We don't expect you to work 24-7 if that's what you are asking (but we do expect 16-hour days)
"Do you allow remote working?" "Yes, someone on our team currently works remotely, it's fine"
A non-straight answer is still an answer and still tells you something.
- Can I talk to a future coworker (aka what is the "real" job and what is the "real" culture like)
- Bro-grammer culture or professional culture? (will I be required to slam shots after hours, play xbox each lunch hour, and whistle at chicks with my coworkers or can I act civilized?). Probably best to ask the "future coworker"
- (assuming I'm replacing someone) What happened to the guy I would replace? (my brand new future boss, fired for cause, died, transfer, prison, quit, or what exactly am I stepping into at least in the rather short term?)
- When would you expect me to start work (tomorrow is a no-go, gimme about 3 weeks?)
- Any weird requirements for dress code?
I will concede that a brogramming environment could theoretically be, for the sake of brevity, civilized. Unlikely, but possible. Hearing phrases at the interview about behavior like "boys will be boys" and discovering at the interview its a hard drinking all straight single white male existing staff might be a bad sign. I can't believe I'm actually advocating for diversity after a lifetime of making fun of it, but...
>> -Do you do performance evaluations / raises?
What's the average percentage of base salary raise your non-management employees received last year?
(cut the crap and just give the real numbers)
>> -Do you allow working remotely?
Do you believe that employee's productivity and ability to contribute to company's success is impossible without him occupying the same office chair every day?
(answering yes would make employer look really stupid)
-I worked at a place for 4.5 years without a single raise.
-I worked at a place that blocked every port other than 80, and that blocked most websites that used post operations, all email websites, and all personal file transfer apps (like dropbox).
-I worked at a place that literally did not allow working remotely, even though it was the kind of place where that actually would have been useful and productive, especially for emergencies.
-I worked at a place that only gave you three sick days per year. After that you were expected to either use your vacation days or accept unpaid days.
-I worked at a place that required 60 hours per week as a bare minimum, but in reality, expected more like 80+
(And these were all high tech companies)
"-I worked at a place for 4.5 years without a single raise."
Did this place have solid revenues? They very well may not have earned a penny, in which case the backers wouldn't necessarily OK a raise.
"-I worked at a place that blocked every port other than 80, and that blocked most websites that used post operations, all email websites, and all personal file transfer apps (like dropbox)."
Were you in a regulated company? (I know you said high-tech but even within that area there are companies bound by various regulations like HIPAA)
"-I worked at a place that literally did not allow working remotely"
See above
"-I worked at a place that only gave you three sick days per year. After that you were expected to either use your vacation days or accept unpaid days."
How many vacation days did they give you? I've seen some companies give more vacation days but force you to take vacation days when you are sick. All in all, I think I would prefer 4 weeks vacation and no sick days versus 2 weeks vacation and 2 weeks sick days.
"-I worked at a place that required 60 hours per week as a bare minimum, but in reality, expected more like 80+"
I'm reminded of the office space scene with the flair. Especially when you are joining an early-stage company, you should expect to work long hours initially (which should taper off as the business settles.
2. No, it was a videogame company.
3. See above.
4. Two weeks, though in my case I was able to argue them to three because I had previously received three weeks at a different job.
5. It was not an early stage company, also it was a company with no proper goals or direction, and massive amounts of mismanagement. You weren't at work for 60-80 hours because you had a lot to do; you were there because they expected you to be there, whether you had work to do or not. Leaving 'early' was cause for shaming because of "letting down all the other hard workers".
edit: I am now working for a company that had answers to all the questions, and did not lie about them, and it is effectively a dream job. Part of asking questions is making sure you get answers, and if you don't, then bail.
As a manager who frequently interviews developers nothing is more deflating than an applicant who, when asked if they have any questions, fumbles an awkward "no, not really" and the interview comes to an abrupt end.
This is a good question, but I'd avoid yes/no questions and ask for examples instead. "What are some things you do to encourage employee learning and growth?"
It's easy to say "yes", even if they're not doing much.
This question can be asked of a prospective boss, a co-worker, or adapted to the company as a whole.
The three main questions I ask are:
What do you do that separates yourself from your competition?
Who do you see as your biggest competitors?
How much have you been working with (insert some cutting edge technology - lately for me, it's been stuff like Backbone.Js or Parallax Scrolling)?
In terms of barometer, it gives me a solid idea of where the company is going, and how they view possible new technologies. These also tend to get, "Wow, that's a great question" from whomever is interviewing me.
I tend to go for "curious" people. They have to ask a lot of quesstions of me (or at least previous people in the interview loop) to show they want to be there. Asking questions about the company/team is a sign that the candidate wants to buy.
This is my new go-to question. Plus, it works both ways, great to ask interviewees and interviewers. It really opens up the conversation and immediately gets to the core of the company/applicant.
As an employer and an employee what I want is engagement not "headcount" that shows up to the milking barn on schedule, gets drained, and kicked back out into the field.
If they don't look it up and are surprised that a certain level of talent inevitably comes with a certain level of anti-authoritarianism, it's not my fault. They were warned.
[edit] It's quite fascinating that I get heavily down-voted every time I mention the entitlement-culture phenomenon. It really makes me cringe to read things like this, when less fortunate (but equally skillful) professionals have a hard time just getting an interview. The pendulum will swing back sooner or later, and we'll look back on this as the golden era of being a Software Engineer.
"I'm not here to be interviewed, I'm going to interview you" "These tremendous company benefits totally suck" "It is my divine right to work from home" "Co-workers are to be seen and not heard" etc etc
I can't reply so [edit], now you're going to tell me "that's how language works"? I stopped reading right there.
It just seems that you say it's wrong for the employees to have the edge, but not for the employer to have it. In another industry there's a lot more job seekers than available positions (e.g. the supply of jobs is lower than the demand). In those industries the company has the edge, it's entitled to hold all power in an interview situation, and can filter applications that try to make certain demands.
In the tech industry, there's big demand for experienced developers. Software engineers can choose a job from several good options. Therefore the applicants are entitled to make certain demands, like asking questions from the employer.
Besides, many employers except this, and say in the beginning of the interview that it's a "two-way interview".
Your comment made it seem that it's okay for only one side to be entitled, that is the company instead of the individual.
However, you could similarly mock most decisions we make in the marketplace. If you live in the first world and you are shopping for houses or apartments, you might decide against one because of the decor. That would seem ridiculously privileged from the perspective of someone who lives in a mud hut. But the fact is that you have options, and you have to choose somehow.
A developer with 10 good job choices has to choose somehow. Whatever differentiates those jobs will be a small matter. But it will be a difference. If the market for developers tanks, we'll lower our standards.
I don't necessarily think that it's WRONG to capitalize on the situation. Everyone is entitled to the best they can get in the job market. But programmers love to go on and on about their first-world problems and it's frankly embarrassing.
I guess I can see where you're coming from. Since demand is high for experienced developers, we have a little more leverage when it comes to negotiating in the job market. I don't think it's entitlement, it's how supply and demand works.
Also, look at the financials of the situation. A software company can (easily) make $1 million/year/engineer, yet the engineer won't see more than a small fraction of that. The other parts of the business: marketing, sales, support, are primary topics on HN.
On this site, a job is just a lower-risk alternative to doing a startup. For all the potential benefits of founding a successful startup, and even the small reputation bonus from founding a failing one, there's a lot that an employer has to offer to compensate.