This post is about an article posted in the Weekend Australian, 14/4/2012 by William Poundstone titled “Don’t Strain Your Brian” which is actually an edited extract from his book titled “Are You Smart Enough To Work At Google?” Due to copyright restrictions I don’t believe I am able to post a copy online. However, if you are interested in reading the article, it can be found here.
Since we sometimes get asked to sit in on interview panels and assist with selection criteria you may already have come across some of the more bizarre interview questions out there. For those that have not, this recent article in the weekend Australian should give an interesting insight into what gets asked.
Personally I’m still on the fence with some of these “left field/creative” questions discussed in the article. “How would you weigh an elephant without using a scale?” “Why are all manhole covers round?” “If you were a cartoon character, which one would you be and why?” (Apparently Yogi Bear is the right answer for that one if you’re at a Bank of America interview.)
Surely if you wanted to test someone’s creative problem solving skills you could provide them a case study more grounded in reality or at least the position they are applying for? Could you really use someone’s favourite cartoon character to help justify a decision on a selection committee report? ...Unless they are applying for Disney, I would hope not.
There are some better left field questions in the article however, most of them coming from Google. These tend to be lateral thinking mathematical problems, probably well suited for software engineers. I would argue a move outside the set standard behavioural questioning can certainly have its advantages, but you need to provide a sound justification for the question, (beyond your own amusement) tied to the selection criteria. Otherwise you’re simply identifying people who are good a talking off the top of their head rather than people which demonstrable skills, key to the position.
No comments:
Post a Comment