From 94c18e02b7a84e0a11270c4325cf2022cd5a7d40 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alexander Goussas Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2026 11:24:11 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] feat: add post on interviewing --- ...ve-learnt-after-one-year-of-interviews.smd | 153 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 153 insertions(+) create mode 100644 content/2026-07-03-what-ive-learnt-after-one-year-of-interviews.smd diff --git a/content/2026-07-03-what-ive-learnt-after-one-year-of-interviews.smd b/content/2026-07-03-what-ive-learnt-after-one-year-of-interviews.smd new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a63ba6a --- /dev/null +++ b/content/2026-07-03-what-ive-learnt-after-one-year-of-interviews.smd @@ -0,0 +1,153 @@ +--- +.title = "What I've learned after one year of interviewing", +.date = @date("2026-07-03T00:00:00"), +.author = "Alexander Goussas", +.layout = "post.shtml", +.draft = false, +--- + +At Thoughtworks, we developers are tasked with running interviews for potential +candidates as part of our contributions to the company. I myself am a +particularly prolific interviewer. I enjoy interviewing, and by now I must have +run around 40 interviews between the last and this year. In this post I will +talk about what patterns I have noticed generally in candidates, what are the +most common mistakes and then about what the interviewing experience has been +like for me. + +## What are most candidates like + +What I am about to say is true for at least 90% of the people I have +interviewed: candidates come to interviews wildly unprepared. + +The amount of technical expertise I expect from candidates depends on what role +they're applying to. For Associate, if their neurons can synapse, then it's +likely a pass (iff they don't commit the mistakes in the next section). The +story changes for Consultants and upward. + +Since I myself joined the company as a Consultant, I am the bar by which I +measure Consultant candidates. At the same time, I have since realized that when +I was hired I was exceptionally technically overqualified for the position. I +did lack the work experience, though. This is to say, I tend to be _quite_ +lenient on the technical side. + +The problem is, most Consultant, and even Senior candidates, do not seem to know +how to program at all. Hell, I even interviewed a Lead once that was the same. +Either they do not really know the programming language for which they applied, +know it superficially, or lack the knowledge and skill to build decoupled and +scalable systems. + +This happens so often that I many times wonder if I should be expecting less. I +remember an instance where I interviewed a Consultant candidate that clearly +knew what they were doing, so I _know_ there is actually qualified people out +there. And I think it is my job as an interviewer to make sure the company can +hire the best possible talent. We are a consulting company offering a product, +which in our case is human talent. It would not be fair for our clients to pay +for a service they expect a certain quality from, only to be given a subpar +one. + +So, in my experience, most candidates are severely underqualified for the +positions they're applying to, and commit many of the mistakes detailed in the +next section. + +## Common mistakes candidates make + +### Coming to the interview unprepared + +I've had candidates interviewing for a Java position that do not know the +language. In these cases, there is simply nothing I can do. We state at the +beginning what the candidate is interviewing for and ask if they are comfortable +continuing with the interview. Even so, so I've candidates not knowing how to +declare a variable or write a method, because they are clearly not acquainted +with the language. In these cases, if the candidate shows good reasoning skills +and expresses having proficiency with other tools, then I would reject them but +suggest they be interviewed for another position. + +### Not speaking while pairing + +The pairing exercise's goal is twofold: to assess the technical skills of the +candidate, as well as their thought process and team work while working on a +given task. The latter is always emphasized at the beginning of interviews, and +yet, many candidates just start coding in absolute silence. This by itself is +not a direct disqualifier, but compounded with the fact that many times these +same candidates present poor technical skills, they're just not helping +themselves. I always tell people, during these kinds of interviews, it's better +to speak too much than too little. And mind you, I don't mean you need to become +my friend during the interview. Being introverted is not an excuse. I literally +just need to hear out loud what you are thinking. + +### Being overconfident and arrogant + +I don't why, but there is many people that overestimate their knowledge. The +reason that would make the most sense to me is that they have always been in a +bubble and have never had to get out of their confort zone, so they literally do +not know how little they know. These candidates often show themselves +overconfident and even arrogant, but when I start to ask basic architecture and +design questions, they don't even understand what I'm asking because they've +never heard the terminology I use. In this case it's not so much their lack of +knowledge that is the problem, which it is, but rather their being unaware of +it. A lack of humility, if you may. + +### Concealing use of AI tools + +This, along with the next point, is one of the most things infuriating +candidates do for me as an interviewer. They would not share their whole screen +and glance furtively and repeatedly to the side before writing any piece of +code. I've even had candidates using sunglasses during the interview, claiming +that they need them for some reason, and others blatantly copy-pasting code from +a concealed screen. Thoughtworks has an AI-first policy, and as such we +interviewers let the candidate know that use of AI tools is permitted during the +interview, so I don't understand this behaviour. Again, what takes points away +from candidates doing this is their lack of honesty rather than something +technical. + +### Trying to bullshit the interviewer + +If I ask a question to a candidate, it's because I have complete command over +the subject. So, if said candidate starts giving a bullshit answer because they +don't actually know, I will notice immediately. I remember on one ocasion in an +Organic Chemistry class me and some comrades had to present a paper. One of my +classmates was completely lost, and started bullshitting the professor, who +called him out on that right away. I remember thinking how does one even attempt +that, and I think the same when it happens to me during interviews. Honestly, +the most infuriating thing is that it just makes both the candidate and the +interviewer waste their times. If said candidate had been honest and said "I don't +know", that would actually score positive points with me, because it shows +honesty and integrity, and technical knowledge can always be acquired. + +## What the ideal candidate looks like + +This section is, of course, entirely subjective and based on my own experience. +To me, the ideal candidate is communicative and honest. They are skilled, but +also have no trouble recognizing when their skill has reached a limit. They are +not necessarily passionate, but they care to do things well, and it shows in how +prepared they are for the interview and their technical expertise. As simple as +that. + +## What has interviewing been like for me + +I don't exactly why, but I always look forward to interviewing. At the same +time, when candidates behave in the way I describe in the previous section, I +hate it because it's a waste of time. If it were on me, I would end the +interview at the first instance of one such mistake. But alas, I am a hopeful +man and believe in second chances. + +Also, I believe interviewing let's me get a look into what the current market +looks like and what kind of people is entering the company. + +Another aspect is that my decision as an interviewer has an impact on whether a +person gets a job or not. When I got into Thoughtworks, I cried because I +thought I was doomed to working in a technically mediocre environment forever, +so I know very well what a lifechanger a job like this can be. That's why I take +my responsiblity as an interviewer very seriously and consider the human being +that just spent an hour with me when making the final decision. + +In the end, one of the core tenets at Thoughtworks is "hiring for potential", +something I wholeheartedly believe in. I am firm believer that anyone can learn +the technical stuff, so I usually only reject candidates when their knowledge is +way below what is required for the job, or when they commit multiple of the +aforementioned mistakes. + +I hope this post is of help to you, dear reader, if you are actively seeking for +a job, and I wish you very good luck in your endeavor. If you have any questions +or would like me to elaborate on anything I expressed here, please feel free to +reach out. -- 2.43.0