We lost candidates due to recruiter screens like this when I was at Google. Not sure why they persist in doing them http://www.gwan.com/blog/20160405.html …
-
My favorite bogus recruiter screen question was "order the these operations by latency". Answer on sheet was 20 years out of date.
We got the question fixed, but our recruiters had been filtering for the literal opposite of what we wanted for years. The opposite. Years.
-
-
Whenever I hear "we can't lower the bar" I find at least one laughable filter in the process; often the literal opposite of what they want.
-
The HN comments have Google employees who claim it's implausible this ever happened to anyone, along with employee who says it's common.
-
Plus many people who claim similar experiences. Funny how often "works for me" turns into "couldn't possibly have not worked for anyone".
-
BTW, policy mandated gdocs for phone screens. Code editors like coderpad, stypi, etc., weren't allowed. I wonder if that's changed.
-
On the bright side, at least it's better than the Amazon intake process! https://rajk.me/amazon-interview-experience/ …pic.twitter.com/7feWbU9w86
-
Round 2. In round 3, you join a replication of the Milgram obedience experiment. J/k, R3 is the job; it only looks like a Milgram experimentpic.twitter.com/tAhg6zIPzZ
-
This is what happens when I refer someone to Microsoft without also forwarding them to a specific hiring manager http://moderndescartes.com/essays/my_ml_path …pic.twitter.com/cY0M5cv7Wm
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.