Ask HN: Weird Interview Process?

I've done this in two different contexts.

One, when you fly somebody out there is often a fixed amount of time to interview them. People run long, etc., and you just don't get enough time to really dig into their skill set. But I liked them, and just want to finish what I started.

Two, things didn't necessarily go so well in the interview, or somebody else raised an issue ("did you ask about XXX - they seemed vague on it?" "No, I didn't") that I want to follow up on.

One way or another you don't have enough information to make a decision about the person, but you are still interested.

If you do futz with your github I'd recommend doing it in a deliberate and proactive way. Instead of just checking in changes, maybe fork or branch it, do the work, and far more importantly, document what you did. Then tell the company you'd like to talk about this project and talk about what you have learned, and how you are working on self improvement. I don't care if somebody doesn't know something; I do care whether they have the drive to learn, because this job is often drinking from a fire hose. Also, I'd be very impressed with somebody who is thinking about things like how to best present themselves, that take initiative to try to solve my problems, where the problem in this case is how do I accurately measure this person in a short time period. If you try to do that, I'm going to want to hire you.

Don't stress. If they are talking to you, then that is a good sign, and they flew you out -- so they must see something in you. You might want to review your code on Github, so that you can address questions, off the top of your head. I wouldn't change though. I highly suspect they just want to see if you know where you could have improved, etc. Rather than being some seasoned superstar who never makes mistakes. So a review on your part, then you can make comments about how you would change things now that you know more, etc.

Here is some general job search advice. Job hunting is more of a machine gun approach, where you try and shoot lots of things, rather than a sniper. I guess what I mean is, research and apply to 10 jobs, then you have a choice, and are not stressed if someone is being weird. Use excel or something, track your progress, write custom cover letters, do your research about the company, etc. When you don't have a job, job hunting is your job, so spend your time wisely and try and make good shots. You have the control. This will likely lead you to negotiate harder, appear to have more confidence, etc. In the long run, if you don't get it, there are tons of other opportunities out there. I once applied and was eventually hired for a public sector job, it took around 6 months to land it, tons of interviews, tests, phone calls, emails, security screening, etc. At the end, I just wanted the entire thing to be over with, one way or the other, so this phone call seems pretty minor, and I wouldn't stress too much.

Thanks, that's good to hear. I figured they could have just rejected me by now if they weren't interested, since I have imagine they have a huge pipeline of candidates.

Talking about improvements should be easy. Every time I look back at code from 6 months ago, I notice things that I don't like, which I assume means I am just improving all the time.

I think your diagnosis is basically correct -- they like you, but got mixed signals during the interview, so they're essentially offering a "re-do" of one of the interviews.

It's not the usual process, but sometimes companies do it. Candidates sometimes come in nervous, or sleep-deprived, or sick, or they just perform awesome in some interviews and bomb one or two. There's a lot of inherent variance in the interview process and this is one way to make sure candidates who are close to the boundary get a fair chance.

I think cleaning up your Github code (comments, good method names, unit tests) is a good idea--it can only help show that you can produce clean code and you want the job.

> is this common? A phone interview after onsite?

Yes, happens all the time. You'll want to address and alleviate any potential concerns they may have. BTW, this is a 2-way dialogue. Have additional questions ready for him.

> Are they interested in me, but just want to buy time to interview another candidate later this week?

It's safe to assume they are speaking with a few very strong finalist candidates. They are trying to determine A) Skills, can you do the job. B) Motivation, will you do the job. C) Fit, can they live with you.

It's OK to tell the hiring executive you felt your performance was sub-optimal. Blame it on rookie nerves. But you're very glad to have a follow-up conversation, because you felt this opportunity is a great match.

Could be good, could be bad. They might have already decided they want to hire you, they might be on the fence, they might have already decided against you. In the end getting hired is mostly a black box. Hundreds of resumes go in one end and a single employe comes out the other.

Maybe branch your GitHub so you retain the original and a "clean up with what I know now" branch.

They still like you or they would have just sent you a "Dear John" letter.

Consider it this way, if you were hiring someone for many thousands of dollars, would it make sense to talk to them more than once?

We got told a bad hire (somebody who leaves after training, e.g. 2-3 months) costs the company $50.000. Time, resources plus finding a new person. So they'll rather make more phone calls than have any doubts.

i'd take it as a positive response since they want to talk to you again or if not you would have been outta the game. good luck on the next interview!