The Ratings Game

Out of all the job interviews I've ever been subjected to, one interviewing method stands out - the ratings method. Or, to be more specific, the rate-yourself method. That's where the interviewer names several skills - PHP, MySQL, project management, lightbulb screwing, yadda yadda - and the interviewee rates himself from 1 to 10, 10 being absolute guru, and 1 being clueless dolt.

My rating!

This is significant because I find this method of interviewing trite and meaningless, and I've often associated those words with the interviewing methods of non-technical people, such as HR. Unfortunately, this method of interviewing has been conducted by IT professionals. People who should know better.

Here's why I consider this method trite and meaningless.

You can't prove I'm lying!

At least during the interview, anyway. Let's say the interviewee rates himself an 9 out of 10 in C#. He could be lying through his teeth, but how do you prove that? Sure, you could ask him some pointed questions about C# to determine if he's as good as he says, but if you're going to do that anyway, why bother with the ratings? If those ratings are going to play any part in the hiring process, I'm not sure I want to be hired based on that.

Ratings are subjective

What's my 10, and what's your 10? When I asked that question, some interviewers have told me to just rate myself from my point of view. And that's exactly why it's meaningless. The interviewee doesn't even have to lie - he just has to be supremely confident (rightly or wrongly) that he's that good. I mean, some people think their database skills are hot shit just because they know how to join tables. They're not lying when they give themselves an 8 out of 10. They simply suck so much that they don't even know they suck. Classic Dunning-Kruger effect right there.

The goalposts keep moving

If you've spent any time in the web industry at all, you'll understand that things seldom stay still. Every facet of web development is changing, and changing fast. What you know today could be obsolete next week. My 10 now could be a very different 10 in a month's time. Let's say I think someone needs to be able to format text and change colors in CSS in order to get a 10 in CSS. (I don't actually suck that much. It's just an example.) After learning more about CSS and levelling up, I might discover CSS animations and realize that the bar is higher than I originally thought. In fact, the more a web developer learns, the lower he is going to (honestly) rate himself.

Final Thoughts

Is this ratings method going away anytime soon? Your guess is as good as mine. It certainly is a time-saver, if nothing else. Why bother having a long talk with the interviewee and assessing his strengths and weaknesses when you can just reduce it all to a number-guessing game?

Would you say this blogpost deserves an 8/10? 8.5, maybe?
T___T