I had a phone screen with the hiring manager (VP of Engineering), and my impressions weren't very favorable. Some of my basic questions were answered vaguely or at best, with answers that I didn't really like.
For example, I asked "what's a typical work week", and at first he talked a bit about how they have flexible hours, and they try to avoid fire drills, and so on... And finally when I asked point-blank if it's 40 hours a week, he said "40-45. There probably are some people who do exactly 40...".
Then I asked "how many people would I be working with" and I didn't really get a clear answer. He told me how many people are in the department, but this role isn't a pure software developer role (it's more on the data side), so that answer didn't really help.
Additionally, this role doesn't have a defined manager yet. It sounds like other candidates apparently have had some confusion about what the role entails.
Overall, this role sounds like it has a lot of ambiguity and would require well over 40 hours/week. (I'm not at all interested in a job that's over 40 hours a week.)
The problem is that I know this role would be an excellent opportunity to get into a serious mid-level role, rather than a junior role where I am currently.
In theory I'd just proceed with the process and make that decision later, but they want a coding assignment done in advance (before calling me in for an interview) and I'm also pretty tight on time (both at home & at my current job) because I'm interviewing with two other companies right now, as well.
Are phone screens (especially with a senior developer) truly reflective of a company's reality? What are some considerations for when to proceed or not to proceed with an interview even after you're unimpressed by a phone screen?
Since he's the VP of Engineering, I'd expect much more from a phone conversation with him, unless this place really is as a big of a mess as it sounds... Of note, I like my current job but I'm looking for more opportunities and higher salary. So switching jobs is not urgent at all for me currently.
-
1It's only a few hours of my time for the literal interview, but the pre-requisite coding assignment will probably take about an hour too... I'm trying to see if there's real reason to think that this role at the company is better than this VP made it sound. – giraffe36 14 hours ago
-
1Okay, it's a few hours plus one more. You get to decide if it's worth your time or not. For me, I tend to believe what the hiring manager tells me. – Joe Strazzere 14 hours ago
-
1This is purely dependent on too many variables to be a useful answer. I hope you don't put too much weight on any answers you get. (ie: the interviewer might have been having a bad day, you might have simply asked him things he doesn't know, some very small and seemingly trivial things can affect the interpretations). – solarflare 14 hours ago
-
9By "phone screen", I assume you mean a telephone interview, to screen candidates? At first I thought this question was about AMOLED displays! And then, while not strictly relevant, I was trying to work out if this was a video-call or audio-only... – Chronocidal 5 hours ago
-
"How much can I judge a company based on a phone screening?" - The answer is 43H – MonkeyZeus 3 hours ago
4 Answers
I've done a lot of interviews in the relatively short time (around 7 years) in the industry.
And one thing i learnt is that, if you sense something not quite right, trust your instinct and don't progress further.
I learnt it the hard way: when I was close to your level, there was an opportunity to move up. However, the interviewer keeps asking me: what will you do if the project is close to deadline? I remember I answered with something along the line of "focus more and work with high efficiency". The interviewer didn't look happy and kept pushing for a different answer. I realized that he was looking for something like "I'll work over time as much as the project requires".
I got the offer. Although I had concerns about the project deadline question, I took it regardless. And you probably can guess what happened next: he asked me to work on public holidays without any compensation. And regular over time was the norm due to the heavy work load I had to take.
Another point is, are you ready to move up to a more senior role? If you think you're ready, then don't worry about missing this opportunity. If you don't get it here, you'll get it somewhere else, possibly a better company, too.
-
“he asked me to work on public holidays without any compensation. And regular over time was the norm due to the heavy work load I had to take.” Why not simply say no? I also don’t understand that concern of OP. If the contract says 40h/week, why shouldn’t you be able to refuse to work more? – Michael 3 hours ago
-
@Michael Risk of eventual career suicide comes to mind. Especially people with less than 5 years experience are rightfully a bit careful about such. – Mast 2 hours ago
-
1@Michael - neither the OP nor this answerer specifies a country. If in fact the country is the US there is no such thing as an employment contract, in the field of software development (and most everything else), that's worth anything, much less what Europeans expect (and apparently, are required) to have. Only if you're executive level or, possibly, sales, will you have such a contract as you're thinking of (and it won't have maximum hours!). Pretty much everyone is "at will" and the federal and state laws govern employment. – davidbak 52 mins ago
An interview is a chance for the interviewer and interviewee to find out if the applicant is suitable for the job and if the job is suitable for the applicant.
If you had failed to answer technical questions to their satisfaction, they would not proceed further (as you would not seem like a good fit).
Likewise, you have conditions you consider essential for the job (you mention not wanting to work more than 40 hours) and they could not tell you that those conditions will be met. As such, you should consider yourself under no obligation to continue with the interview process.
You're currently employed, and since you're in the interview stage with three companies your skills are clearly in demand. Take your time and find a job that's right for you. You don't need to jump at every opportunity.
During phone screens, and the entire interview process, both candidate and company are trying to show themselves in a positive light.
If the manager says
"40-45. There probably are some people who do exactly 40"
... the literal meaning is "everyone works overtime as far as I know".
Assume that this is a positive spin on the actual situation.
I asked point-blank if it's 40 hours a week
Good job being direct.
(I'm not at all interested in a job that's over 40 hours a week.)
If that's the case, this isn't the job for you.
There are employers out there who will say "we do not want you to work overtime; we value your long-term happiness and productivity more than your short-term output." Keep looking and asking direct questions as you did here, and you'll find one of them.
-
2Personal anecdote: my first full-time software developer job was at a place that I sensed might be an overworking environment during the interview process, but I really wanted the job. I asked the same kinds of questions you did and got the same kinds of answers. My intuition was right - I worked overtime every week, and my first review was negative because I wasn't working enough for them. I left quickly. From then on, I've filtered for employers who do not demand overtime, and I'm very happy with my career so far (~12 years). – Nathan Long 3 hours ago
Simply remember that, as we like to stress around here, interviews go both ways. Then read Joel Spolsky's – co-founder and CEO of stackoverflow – article The Guerrilla Guide to Interviewing and invert the roles.
So in the referenced article, the candidate is not a developer, but, in your case, the company.
The trick is telling the difference between the superstars and the maybes, because the secret is that you don’t want to hire any of the maybes. Ever.
[...]
Why am I so hardnosed about this? It’s because it is much, much better to reject a good candidate than to accept a bad candidate. A bad candidate will cost a lot of money and effort and waste other people’s time fixing all their bugs. Firing someone you hired by mistake can take months and be nightmarishly difficult, especially if they decide to be litigious about it. In some situations it may be completely impossible to fire anyone. Bad employees demoralize the good employees. And they might be bad programmers but really nice people or maybe they really need this job, so you can’t bear to fire them, or you can’t fire them without pissing everybody off, or whatever. It’s just a bad scene.
[Emphasis and omission mine]
As you are looking for full-time employment, you can only accept one job. Imagine you could only hire one employee! You should be even more wary than the article insists. Think about it: How much effort will it take you to change jobs once you realize you don't want to continue working there?
In my eyes, the very fact that you are posting here is already a red meta flag.
