<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Interviewing on Hillel Wayne</title>
    <link>https://www.hillelwayne.com/tags/interviewing/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Interviewing on Hillel Wayne</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    
	<atom:link href="https://www.hillelwayne.com/tags/interviewing/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    
    
    <item>
      <title>A Better Interview</title>
      <link>https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/a-better-interview/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 08 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/a-better-interview/</guid>
      <description>Caveats: I&amp;rsquo;m not an interviewer, I&amp;rsquo;ve never done serious research on interviews, and I haven&amp;rsquo;t tested this. I propose this entirely as a thought experiment.
Assumptions: We interview at jobs to find ideal candidates. WE are looking for candidates who are
 Good at programming Good at software engineering Can work in a team A &amp;ldquo;culture fit&amp;rdquo; (not an asshole).  Technical interviews test the first two. They are primarily whiteboard questions, abstract design questions, or &amp;ldquo;write this program&amp;rdquo; questions.</description>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>