undefined | Better HN

0 pointsneilv1mo ago0 comments

Some good points. Just a heads-up about something interesting I heard/read in training...

"Innocuous" icebreaker questions about hobbies, the weekend, or whatever, can be surprisingly problematic.

The questions and answers often inadvertently imply things about family status, religion, physical ability/disability, socioeconomic class, age, heritage, etc. that interviews are supposed to steer clear of.

For me, this was best illustrated by one of the https://www.linkedin.com/in/lornaerickson/ funny video skits, in which the interviewer character was using "innocuous icebreaker" chat aggressively to try to extract information all over the no-no list of things you aren't supposed to ask.

(Then the skit was funny again, after the fact, when I was in an interview with some barely-out-of-school founder, who was intentionally doing one of the things from the skit...)

0 comments

6 comments · 3 top-level

DangitBobby1mo ago· 2 in thread

Why would you want to work somewhere that you can't talk about your life, the things that bring you joy, your hobbies? Sounds miserable.

sokoloff1mo ago

Plenty of time to talk about your life and hobbies once hired. If I’ve got 45 minutes to make a recommendation based on an evaluation, I don’t want to base any of that on your relationship/family status or pets, I certainly don’t want to give the impression that maybe I did that, and therefore, I don’t want to spend any time talking about it in the interview.

dmoy1mo ago

You can talk about it at work, after you're hired, like with your coworkers. The company can't ask you about a lot of things in an interview without exposing them to a significant amount of legal liability.

anyfoo1mo ago· 1 in thread

Good points. My hypothetical had the implicit assumption that the interviewer was acting in good faith when asking the weekend question. But that doesn't mean that interviewers necessarily are, of course.

neilvOP1mo ago

Yeah, and even in good faith, the questions can be problematic.

Example: At the very start of the interview, candidate suddenly feels like they have to hide something about their religion, sexual orientation, or whatever, in how they answer. Or feels like their candid answer to the icebreaker was not received well.

Which is the opposite of what the interviewer intended, with an icebreaker, but their training didn't include how tricky casual icebreakers can be.

ryandrake1mo ago

> The questions and answers often inadvertently imply things about family status, religion, physical ability/disability, socioeconomic class, age, heritage, etc. that interviews are supposed to steer clear of.

I had a bizarre interview (at an extremely well-known company with an eccentric, controversial founder) where the recruiter asked me directly questions that "BigTech interview training" explicitly taught me to never ask or even walk close to. I was actually shocked and stammered out an awkward "Uhh, I'm pretty sure it's fraught with risk to even ask those things" non-answer, but she seemed genuinely surprised I wouldn't go into personal family details during a professional job interview. So, it seems not everyone has gotten the memo...

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse