Assess Proficiency In Job Search And Interview Situations: Fill & Download for Free

Having interviewed a few hundred candidates across Google, Ooyala, and Quora, I would contend that the situation is quite the opposite, particularly if you're interviewing at the faster-moving end of companies like the typical startup. The choice of programming language matters, and most candidates I've interviewed who can only code in C, C++, or Java put themselves at a competitive disadvantage relative to those who use Ruby or Python.In an engineering interview, you typically only have thirty minutes to an hour to impress your interviewer and to demonstrate that you can solve technical problems and get things done quickly. The faster you can complete a problem correctly, the more quickly I, as an interviewer, can move onto harder problems or assess your other skills.Your choice of programming language is therefore important to the extent that it affects the speed with which you can solve problems. Languages like C, C++, or Java tend to be significantly more verbose than more productive languages like Python or Ruby that come with more powerful built-in primitives like list comprehensions, functional arguments, destructuring assignment, etc.Research by Prechelt that compared 80 implementations of the same set of requirements across 7 different languages showed that solutions written in C, C++, and Java were on average 2-3x longer in terms of non-comment lines of code than scripting languages like Python. [1] Paul Graham has also written extensively that one of the competitive advantages of his Viaweb startup was a more powerful and productive programming language. [2]The research lines up with my personal interview experiences, and I'd estimate that it takes the typical candidate roughly 3 times longer to express the same algorithm on the board in a non-scripting language than it does in a scripting language. In interviews where a candidate actually needs to write executable code on a computer, the time that a person spends compiling C, C++, or Java code is time that another candidate who's proficient at Python or Ruby is using to address the actual problem itself. Once you factor in the additional time needed to recover from mistakes or bugs, the absolute time differences start to compound. Each minute spent writing boilerplate code or additional syntax for a less productive language is a minute not spent tackling the meatier aspects of a problem.The ability to choose the right tool for the job is an important skill. Choosing a less productive language makes me wonder as an interviewer whether you'd choose less productive tools on the job, like trying to write C++ or Java code to parse and format files when someone can be orders of magnitude faster using shell scripts or a scripting language.There are two exceptions I would make for candidates that use C, C++, or Java on a problem that could be more quickly solved with a language like Ruby or Python:If you're a fresh college grad who hasn't picked up a scripting language, I tend to be more lenient and evaluate whether I think you can pick one up quickly on the job.If you're more experienced, really proficient at C, C++, or Java, and can solve a problem as quickly as a good programmer who uses Python or Ruby, then that's a strong a skill to have, and I'll take into account that it'd probably be easy for you to pick up a scripting language. Still, there would be a lingering doubt in my mind wondering why you didn't learn a more productive language over the years, since you would've been able to solve the problem that much more quickly.All that said, there are probably certain interview situations where using a non-scripting language might be desirable. If you're interviewing for a search company or a company that focuses on iOS or Android development, using C++, Objective-C, Java, or whatever the core language is at the company would certainly help demonstrate that you could be effective on the job quickly. If you don't know a scripting language well, it's better to use a language you're proficient at, though it'd be even better to just get proficient at a scripting language. Ultimately, you want to pick the programming language that most effectively demonstrates that you'd be productive. My advice would be to ask your interviewer if he or she has a preference, and if not, to choose the most productive programming language for the problem.Looking for more interview and career advice? This answer is based on a blog post I wrote on The Effective Engineer. Subscribe to read more.[1] http://page.mi.fu-berlin.de/prechelt/Biblio/jccpprt_computer2000.pdf[2] http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html

I’m not a job coach or specialist at all in this area, just a normal job seeker. But my question might be “why would you need to ask in the interview?”It seems that a great portion of the time an employer will announce the starting salary in a position, whether it’s in the advertisement itself, the recruiter helping you set up the interview, or the interviewer themselves disclosing the salary up front. If the salary is not known by the time the interview is finished, it doesn’t seem that it will be a very positive impression to the potential employer if you say “hey what is my salary going to be?” The candidate’s job is to show the interviewer they are a high quality match for the position, including skills, proficiency, and personal traits they will bring to the table. And at the other end the employer is out to find the best match and appeal to the best candidates, but they reveal the immeasurable parts of the company first—the people, mission, industry, and so forth. The talk of logistics, salary, etc., will unfold naturally if both sides have made a connection, whether by the employer stating the salary up front or asking what the candidate’s ideal salary is.Really, if the answer is not in bold print even in the advertisement or with the recruiter conversation, it’s up to you to do your homework and find out what the typical starting salary might be. Just like you should be doing your homework on the company’s profile, the job responsibilities and tasks, and hiring objectives you should be doing your homework about salary. Twenty-five plus years ago before the world wide web, candidates usually could ask through the grapevine or scour materials at their local library to find what the projected salary would be. Today, websites like Glassdoor Job Search | Find the job that fits your life offer real life reviews of what the job entails and what the starting pay should be. Also, doing the demographics research about cost of living and average starting salaries in that area will give you a good expectation of what your starting salary might be.Another important step is developing a conversation with the recruiter if there is one. The question of salary can be subtle and mixed in with other parts of the recruiter conversation, which is like a preliminary interview and conversation. Mentioning things like, “so, I imagine my new position will be in the same class as what I was doing before, with maybe some more requirements. Do you think the salary is similar to what I was doing or a little more competitive.” This is a little less direct than “oh what’s this thing pay by the way?” If the recruiter is evasive about pay, that might be the sign for you to say, oh okay maybe I’ll find something else. This Forbes link is a great place to start for recruiter conversations. The Real Reason Job Ads Don't Include A Salary RangeDuring the interview process, if the interviewer has not mentioned anything about salary and hasn’t asked you what your salary requirements are, take a moment to assess the situation. It might be the connection is not there and they don’t want to disclose the salary to a person who won’t be getting the job. And if they aren’t even taking the time to offer you any sort of insight about the company and the main things you will receive from working there(company pride or greater learning would be a start if salary is not hinted at), this is a sign it might not be a good fit for you. A great way to show you’ve found out details about the position and are genuinely interested would be to ask “what might be some things you offer your employees that other companies don’t offer?” And then if they mention a competitive salary along with other specific things, this might be a hint they will make you a great offer soon so more doesn’t need to be said. If they say something vague or half-hearted, that’s a sign to look for someplace else.Often, though, the interviewer will mention the salary or ask you what your starting salary requirements might be. If you’ve done your homework, then you are on good ground. If they mention the salary and ask you if that’s what you had in mind, you can always process the data they’ve given and answer how it fits with what you’re looking for. If they ask you to give an ideal salary range, show you have an understanding of the company and industry, linking it to your previous positions and skills:“Based on the average industry starting salary in the area, I’d say ——- is a valuable starting range.”“I see that this position has many of the same requirements and tasks as my previous plus a few more responsibilities, so given my previous salary was ——-I might look to (stay in the same range/seek a slightly higher salary).”

People already pay a variety of fees to be on job lists. It’s an abomination.But, people call all the time offering jobs. Many of the jobs are quite awful.The matching for jobs is done by key words and human enforcers (people who say they are trying to help you) do a miserable job of reading past the key words and understanding what it is that you are trying to do with yourself.So, the ‘AI’ that is already in use is really pretty bad. That’s BAD.I remember when there was new OCR company that started reading resumes and the job search changed. It is supposed to be better for everyone, employers, workers. But, really that’s when the key word thing (which is horrifically bogus) started being a priority to finding work.How many Cordon Bleu chefs have been matched with McDonalds line jobs by now? Many!OK. But, when you relent and take a job that’s going to lead nowhere nearer to your goal or help your career or even pay well enough to survive in job rich cities, what are other parameters that are never investigated?I started in with contracting companies in the last few years. They are quite bad in the treatment of people. And, some push testing to get to the most of their jobs. This is more like Java proficiency tests for jobs requiring Java, but were Java might have been the wrong choice for the technical development.Those of us who do this for work can easily ask if certain developments are being well directed. I can’t think of any placement company, contract company, or other that cares to ask if the management of a project has any idea as to how to run their project.Since many organizations can produce absolute junk and still get customers, placement companies are more apt to err in using money as a sign that a project is good. And, they may as well program machines to tell them which companies are good to work with based on this criteria.Well, I took a few contracts. The boring ones were sometimes better run. But, not always. Sometimes the boring ones are dumbed down projects that allow a lifestyle club to eat it up at corporate expense. But, given the money criteria, the placement companies, with their key word matching and money oriented evaluation algorithms will tell the prospective worker that they are walking into the best place possible. And so, they lie willfully to the prospective employees about their future jobs, not necessarily because they know that, but because they fail to look further than the surface.I took interviews in poorly matched positions only because I worried about my salary for the next six months and I was willing to consider junk projects of short duration as not evil.Once I was walked out of an interview at Apple when one of the most obscenely spoiled tall blond woman had me exited from talking to her all Indian team for whatever reason, except she likely wakes up in the morning and studies her own face in the mirror and asks who is the fairest of them all. The job looked to me like something miserable to do. And, they were talking about wanting an engineer. Getting to the interview was a nightmare, I ended up hours late due to San Jose traffic. Someone asked about my worst work experience. Erring toward honesty, I told them about the nude professor at CMU who got me kicked out of being a research assistant, only because he wanted to avoid more sexual harassment charges. Perhaps the young lady with no respect for seasoned professionals thought I was being perverse. Or, perhaps she hates honesty. Or, perhaps she thought such a professor was a cool guy. Whatever, I received insult when I should have had more respect. I received this insult from someone who thinks she’s entitled.I should never have gone to that interview. It made me think that Apple culture is horrible. It grew one more branch in the tree of knowledge having to do with why some people are horrible. And, it waisted my time.The placement company, a company that spoke with at length about the sorts of things I would like to be doing had formed their own bigoted opinion about what I should be doing. I heard the manager over the phone barking about what he thinks my role should be. The man most likely was about to go scratch his own balls. (I couldn’t think of another way to say it.) It’s like having a monkey on the other end of the line deciding whether you are a taxi driver by trade or a soup maker. But, the guy never really listened to you, and he’s so sure he’s write he gloats.But, I did take one job from that company. “At last!” I thought. And, yes, I found one more psychopathic job lead who knew when to act obsequiously and when to pull some antics. The bald fat man once came in not wearing his underwear. He told me about it and acted coyly. I had to take in the sight of his hairy fat butt sitting in my chair at my cubicle while he talked about ways to get a program done all wrong. Of course, he picked the most destructive path for the project. I was happy that he did not get as nude as my professor in college.OK. The placement firm. One of the biggest firms in the business.Why do we have to deal with such trash?I just want to find real work. So, I am always having to ask anyone of these possible jobs what the project is. No one can tell me. So, I can only find out if I got to an interview, which I will only get if people drop some prejudice. I get there and I have to find out first hand if the group at the company, no matter how big or how small, how famous or how unknown, knows what they are doing. I am the one who gets ‘rejected’ if I suss out that the person in charge is an idiot.Does, the degree the person has indicate intelligence? No! You can only try the person out for reasonable behavior on their part by talking to them, so it seems. But, you might talk to a person who is reasonable only to find out on the first day of your job that you will never see that person again - a form of bait and switch.The bait and switch thing happened at the company with the fat bald guy who sometimes made a point of not wearing underwear. I talked to one guy, assessed that the guy was on the up and up, and had some idea about the technology that was being used. But, I never saw him again. The company happened to be a very large, well known, defense projects business. (Not saying more.)So, would I have liked a program that could really tell me what a project is and who I will be working for? YES!!!!!!!!And, I am certain, really certain, that I am not alone in this.For instance, in the last company, if I had had some way of knowing that the person I would be spending most of my time with had had a history of being arrested for drunk in public, I would have guarded myself more carefully. I might have taken the job and established a formal way of communicating with my subject at the very beginning. I would have also liked to have known more about the balance of power in the situation. They company members had the right to make bad decisions and have their lousy choices reflect on me as if I caused technical trouble. But, their technical ability was not that good - and that was a source of trouble. If I could have had some information about that, it would have helped. It would have been good if I knew that the person who interviewed me was someone I would never meet again. And, the project already had some baggage with people leaving. If I had some idea of what came before in that regard, the situation would have been better.I might have taken the job even with certain problems if I had some knowledge ahead of time. But, I might have avoided the job altogether, even if it meant being really poor for a while.Then, there are day to day realities of being in a place. San Jose, is extremely expensive. And, these guys did not really supply any money for staying in the area. So, a fair arrangement for staying in the area might have been worked out as something demanded by a computer system. For instance, it might be state law that an AI program that arranges for workers to be in a place set the workers up with temporary residence or some other arrangement. Also, people think you have to be in their offices to work. But, that is not always the case. An AI program could at least report on how much the worker has to be in the offices of their subjects.In fact, if I did not have to stay in the small, makeshift office space for the last projects, I might have had a better interaction with the subjects. But, it was really not a good interaction. Not the worst. But, not in the realm of a decent interaction.So, I think there are many ways in which a program could help. I think that it can help mostly because people who bring in employees don’t have practical ideas about brining in workers to begin with. There is too much subjective stuff on the table. Things like, “I get to be the boss now”, v.s. “this project requires this many people” or “Now I get to tell someone what to do” v.s. “I don’t know how to do this stuff so I’ll just let that guy get his job done.” People don’t understand that management or lead is not their new power position or their chance to have human toys for the first time in their pathetic lives. So, much can be done to make the processes of staffing up objective and to satisfy those who work as well as those who employ.For instance, demanding that someone come to your office when it is not required. The employee has to undergo a great deal of stress and strain to get to the office, and then they have to endure having their personal lives probed. None of that is pleasant. What I eat for lunch is my own business. If we can enjoy that together, fine. But, if you start digging into my choices and telling me I should know better, I think it starts interfering with work. Something like lunch is a small thing, But, people don’t stop their, and the next thing you know is that you’re seeing body parts. (Or, maybe someone will spend huge amounts of time trying to convert you to their religion - also just a little too invasive - but nicer in some ways.)Education, advancement, the success of projects does not need junk. It can be more objective. Can an AI program make thing more objective?I think it is possible. But, I think past attempts were shams, like key word matching, that we are all suffering from now more than being helped in any way. Such programs, which might be considered AI programs are really bad, awful, horrible, despicable, loathsome programs. We are already placing great faith in such travesties.So, I am fairly sure that a really good AI program, a wonderful AI program, would be very successful.