The Case of the Awkward Tech Interviewee

It's been a while since I attended a job interview. As an applicant, anyway.

Recently, I was on the other side of the interview, reviewing candidates for a tech position within my company. The interviewee in question was a nervous-looking Malaysian. There wasn't anything that really stood out, except for his awkwardness. Which, in itself, was a problem. You see, for tech positions, sometimes one can get away with not being able to communicate that well. The stereotype of socially-inept but brilliant techies exists for a reason.

Brilliant but
awkward?

However, this particular position was for a leadership role. And lack of communication skills just wasn't going to fly. I could tell that my co-interviewer had already written our applicant off and was about to call it in, but I persisted. We'd already scheduled and allotted the time; I figured that I might as well develop the muscle memory I needed for being an interviewer.

Besides, it could have been just nerves. Some people have told me I can be intimidating, a statement I consider laughable. Please, look at this face. Nothing about me is remotely intimidating.

Either way, I decided to give him a question he could answer. I asked him to explain what he would do to combat SQL Injection. His answer, predictably, was "Stored Procedures". My follow-up, probably just as predictably was why Stored Procedures? What do Stored Procedures do that normal SQL queries don't?

He stammered. Hemmed. Hawed.

After a few minutes, I put him out of his misery. I told him to Google the term "paramterized queries". And then told him that in future, if anyone ever asked him a question like that again, he should refer to that, rather than simply say "Stored Procedures". It would be a better, more complete, more correct answer. And more importantly, it would be an answer that instilled confidence in the asker of the question, confidence that the answerer knew his shit.

After we were thanked him for his time and bade him goodbye, my co-interviewer turned to me and asked me why I'd spent so much time on this guy. Did I see some potential that he'd missed?

I replied, simply, that we obviously weren't going to give him the job... so I might as well give him something.

People commented on my perceived generosity, or at least, on me "paying it forward". I don't think either is true. This was decidedly not about making the tech industry a better place, or even giving back.

Back then...

Upon further reflection, something similar happened to me in the days when I was the applicant. There were times when I sensed I had failed the interview, and when the interviewer asked if I had any questions, I ventured out of the box.

I asked for advice. And this paid off in spades. They proceeded to tell me more or less where I'd gone wrong. We all knew I wouldn't make it past this round, but they at least thought I deserved a fighting chance... somewhere else. They wanted me to succeed, again, somewhere else. I guess it helped that His Teochewness has such a winning personality.

Seeking answers.

I think that helping candidates along is a very natural instinct on the part of any tech interviewer who takes their job seriously. Of course, it helps if the applicant doesn't piss them off. One may object on the grounds that this helps applicants cheat on their next tech interview. That's only true if they get asked the exact same question next interview. Also, let's be real, answers are all over the internet.

And from a cynical point of view, even if it's true that you're enabling inferior candidates to "cheat", they'd likely be "cheating" at the interviews of your competitors. Nobody really needs me to explain this one now, do they?

It's probably also true that techies generally like to look out for other techies. Some little tribal instinct there. Us geeks against the laypersons.

To conclude...

Interviews need not be an adversarial exercise. Your interviewers want you to succeed, or at least not turn out to be a total waste of time. Selfishly, because they already invested the time and energy into prepping for this interview, and conducting it. From that point of view, they get nothing if you turn out to be a dud.

Therefore, they don't need to love you. They just need to not severely dislike you. And the rest takes care of itself.

Without question,
T___T