Interviews - Are they really a Science?
Interviews are genuinely quite crazy. It such an intimate interaction between two people with several ambient parameters affecting judgement. To my mind, it is close to impossible to ensure repeatability in interviews.
It has happened, to us at CoCubes.com, that we have rejected somebody and then 6 months later, ended up hiring the same person- and the person then ends up doing a great job- Obviously, this doesn't speak too highly of the levels of standardization of our hiring processes. It doesn't obviously happen all the time, but I know it has happened once. And this makes me wonder about the scientific'ness' of the process.
But the larger point I am trying to draw attention towards is that, students should not hasten to read into interview results. Inspite of existing pressures to get a job, students have to, with some maturity, understand, that results of an interview can in no logical way imply anything negative or positive about the innate capabilities of the student.
If possible, the student should try to learn from the experience, any clear objective actionable things; The interviewer should aim to be polite, forthcoming, and sincere in his/her feedback to the candidate. The student should look for the silver lining, believe in his/her own abilities and move on (stay connected to the interviewer by email, Linked In- drop in a Hi- How are you? What you are doing now? - six months from interview).
Ofcourse, as I write this, I am drawn back to the drawing board to increased standardization in our own interview process- which will give me a more peaceful sleep!
Good Night- at least to you!











