Slashdot Log In
Microsoft's Personnel Puzzle
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Jul 07, 2005 03:54 PM
from the curious-decisions dept.
from the curious-decisions dept.
theodp writes "CNET reports on Microsoft's reputation for arrogance in its personnel practices, citing the experience of Arthur Sorkin, who responded to an unsolicited invitation to interview with MS back in 2000. But instead of trying to sell him on the company or the job, interviewers challenged him with a technical 'pop quiz.' Sorkin, who holds a PhD in CS, withdrew his application. During the past year, Microsoft called Sorkin to say it had scheduled a phone interview with him for another job, although Sorkin hadn't applied for it and no one had asked if he was interested."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Spam (Score:4, Funny)
Sounds like Spam!
Re:Spam (Score:4, Interesting)
These are the computing equivalents of the sorts of tricks you keep on hand for bar bets... [askmen.com]
You know, it's really hard to hire people. but testing them on recall of something out of the CS Grad's Standard Toolkit is perfectly fine, if you want to know if they're loaded and ready to roll, but it's kind of a dumb way to figure out if you'd want to hire them. Three questions of this nature and that's it? I'd be insulted.
spoiler alert, but oh my god this is one of the oldies...
bitwise:
A = A xor B
B = A xor B
A = A xor B
and you've swapped the values.
Wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org]
Parent
Re:Spam (Score:5, Funny)
But that's EXACTLY the kind of person Microsoft wants.
A "whiz kid" who can do something clever without thinking about the overall consequences - such as security or even simple common sense.
Somebody who can't threaten Bill's ego or raise issues about system design or corporate behavior they don't want to have to deal with.
None of those tests is really relevant to turning out a well-designed, well-coded and documented system. Maybe if you're doing embedded work in 16K on some microcontroller - or Tiny BASIC back in the 1970's when Bill learned his trade. I'd look for something a lot more conceptual such as how would one handle the documentation of such-and-such a code module.
It's like I've always suspected. Microsoft wants inexperienced whiz kids right out of school or experienced guys who can't think about anything but code.
And it shows in their systems.
Parent
Re:Spam (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yea man, you're in for a real karma spanking posting something like that on Slashdot.
Parent
Why is this news? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
mv
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
mv /mnt/fuji /dev/null
If you wanted to get the job with MS, you would have to change that to:
move "C:\Mount Fuji" C:\RECYCLEDParent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
mv
Would you like to overwrite device file
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
The original answer is still correct in that case.
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
I would use a static warp shell to lower its mass in this inertial frame of reference and then pick it up.
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
On second thought, Mt. Fuji is still somewhat active, might be best to have them sign a disclaimer, in case they are lavanated.
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
2) Announce that the competition will never be able move mount fuji and that once you move mount fuji there is a real chance they will go out of business.
3) Announce that since you will move mount fuji any day now it makes no sense to buy anything from a competitor.
4) Announce that you will not be moving all of mount fuji just "the important parts"
5) Announce that you have already moved part of mount fuji and show the press a bucket of dirt.
6) Get a truckload of dirt from mount fuji, dump it in redmond and proudly announce that you have successfully moved mount fuji.
7) Keep claiming that MS has moved mount fuji and that it's the most innovative and amazing thing ever done by anybody anywhere. Pay ZDNET lots of money to repeat that announcement five times a day for six months.
8) Voila! MS has moved mount fuji, anybody who claims otherwise is a communist, hippie, terrorist.
Parent
How I moved Mt. Fuji (Score:5, Interesting)
Ascended Fuji. I was #2 in the group to reach summit.
Assembled the instrument. Splitting headache from the ascent.
I played "Amazing Grace" and "Morag of Dunvegan" looking down into the crater.
The mountain was moved.
For 500 yen, a fellow lit off a blowtorch and stamped the foot of the chanter (a hard-plastic Dunbar-Eller) with some Kanji that say "Top of the Hill, 3220m" IIRC.
Trying to play the instrument at that elevation qualifies as full-on stupid, but WTF, it's braggin' rights on
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Interesting)
I was *supposed* to be thinking about how I could link the coffee machine to the a wireless network so I could sync it with my WiFi alarm clock and e-mail program, said the interviewer.
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all here. Mr AC, obvously a thoughtful and experienced engineer, thinks about good design from the ground up, making sure the subsystems are modular and robust and that the entire device is practical. The Microsoft interviewer doesn't give a toss about whether it's stable or not - just whether it has connectivity enough to sync with Outlook.
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Why is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
To: Car Coffee Maker
From: Me
Subject: Work
Dear Coffee Machine,
I plan on leaving for work at 6:15AM tomorrow. Please have 4 cups of Breakfast Blend prepared just prior to my departure.
Regards,
Me
Parent
Re:why manhole covers are round, really (Score:5, Interesting)
The real reason manhole covers are round reflects late 19th century manufacturing technology. In the late 19th century, casting worked fine, but the only power tools were lathes, planers, and steam hammers. Milling machines and welders were in the future.
Given that toolset, a round manhole cover is an easy thing to make - cast, chuck in lathe, finish machine in one setup. A manhole cover ring, which needs a little finish machining to clean up the inside of the ring, is also straightforward. Simple, cheap, and suitable for volume production.
Making a rectangular plate with 1890s technology is harder than making a round one. It would probably require four passes through a power planer, which is a more expensive machine than a lathe. Making a rectangular manhole frame with that toolset is really tough. You can't use a lathe to do the finish machining. It's tough to get a planer into the inside of a rectangle. You'd need a specialized planer with a long reach, and it would take at least four setups to do the job, probably eight to get into each corner from both directions. Today, you'd cut four straight sections and weld the parts together, which is how rectangular frames are made today. But that option didn't exist in 1890.
Take a look at a steam locomotive from that era. All big metal parts consist of cast surfaces, flat machined surfaces, circular machined surface. Anything else was really difficult to make.
Parent
Well... (Score:4, Funny)
Counter Stike Degree? (Score:4, Funny)
bad minds = bad software (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if a product is so big that one person can't understand it, you can still understand what you're working on.
This remind me of the "Joel on Software" article about python. Better software developers stay up-to-date because they want to. Lesser software develoeprs stay up-to-date because they have to.
Why would working at Microsoft be interesting, unless you're political?
Best Interview Question Ever (Score:5, Funny)
"How on earth could you ever work for Microsoft, the big evil company??"
Probably the best question I've ever been asked in an interview.
Re:Best Interview Question Ever (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Best Interview Question Ever (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
What happens with many big organizations... (Score:5, Insightful)
It looks funny from the outside, because even though we know better, it's easy to think of any large organization (i.e., Microsoft) as a single entity, when it's actually a group of individuals flying in loose formation, each doing what they percieve to be their job. Sometimes two people's jobs in such an organization will run to cross-purposes.
Re:What happens with many big organizations... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
MS vs. Google (Score:5, Interesting)
It's only one anecdotal data point, but it does suggest a simple fact of life. Success breeds arrogance whether a company is "evil empire" or seeks to "do no evil."
Re:MS vs. Google (Score:5, Insightful)
One of my friends worked for Google, and he told me their stories. We both worked for Microsoft. Google is FAR more arrogant. Among other things, they decided to open a branch in India because they've "exhausted the talent supply in the United States." This is all the more remarkable because they only have a few thousand employees, only a few hundred in NYC. Apparently they've got all 300 or so good programmers in NYC. That certainly came as a shock to me, especially considering that most other places in NYC pay MUCH more than Google does. Perhaps they've exhausted the supply of talented people willing to work for half the industry standard wage?
In any case, arrogance breeds downfall, soon enough. Most of the Microserfs I met were not terribly arrogant, not moreso than your average techie at least. Though Google loving seems to be the order of the day, I'm not such a fan. A company valued at 100x earnings that thinks it vomits sunshine, well, granny's pension fund is going to lose some money.
Parent
Re:MS vs. Google (Score:5, Interesting)
Eventually, the executive board decided not to waive the GPA requirement for him, and they ended up not hiring the guy who the group themselves thought was as good as you could get for the job.
Any company that doesn't listen to their group, which is fighting to hire a guy, are absolute morons.
Parent
Doh! (Score:5, Insightful)
You watch. They're going to start handing out tonnes of free development software to get people re-interested in developing for Windows. With web apps all the rage, who needs 95% of the market with desktop apps when you can develop with PHP, Rails or other open source tools and get 100% of the market with web apps?
MS pre-sales candidate told to lie to customers (Score:5, Interesting)
After the interview I heard back from Microsoft and was told that they wouldn't give me the job as my answer showed I wasn't prepared to back up their sales techniques. I was amazed. Basically they wanted me, as a pre-sales consultant, to lie to prospective customers about the capabilities of MS software. I've been in situations before where I've had to dig my company out of sour deals where salesmen have lied to customers about products they're buying, and it ain't nice. Too hear that MS do this shouldn't have been a suprise, but to hear it officially certainly changed my mind about working for them.
Re:MS pre-sales candidate told to lie to customers (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Microsoft Interview (Score:5, Informative)
Their phone interview process was a good mix of explaining what it is they were doing and how I could help, and making sure that I was the right mix of skills and cleverness to fit in with the group.
I passed that round, and was invited to Redmond to interview in person. I found the whole on-site interview process to be a lot of fun -- I'd heard that the interview process was gruelling, painful, challenging, etc... but I thought it was fun. And shortly thereafter, they offered me the position.
Fully half the time I've spent talking to Microsoft has been on the topic of what they have to offer me, and it was considerable.
In the end, I decided not to relocate to Redmond, mainly because I wanted to finish up my BS (three semesters to go at the time, now one more), which I'd been working on part time for eight years, while working as a software engineer.
So I guess in the end, if you don't enjoy that kind of interview, maybe you're not really qualified, despite your education. There are plenty of places where all the cleverness in the world is worthless, but the skills required to earn that PhD are essential (I can't imagine working in an evironment like that... but hey, each unto their own).
Personally, I found the whole experience to be very positive, and if after I finish my BS, the PhD doesn't work out, I might be taking that permanent trip to Redmond after all.
-brian
Now that's something to boast about (Score:5, Funny)
It's easy when Microsoft offers them exorbitant wages of 40 Rupees an hour!
Unsolicited invitation... (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a difference between you asking them for a job and them asking you if you want a job.
Parent
Re:The second sentance maybe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you never actually had a job before? I've had jobs handed to me, and then had to go through the whole process of being "interviewed", background check, tons of paperwork, etc. Large corporations have to show they hired fairly, hence even when a job is specifically for you, you still have to be chosen acceptable for the job by the HR folks.
Parent
Re:Not that I'd ever side with MS... (Score:4, Insightful)
Our company does this, other companies I've interviewed do this. You can't blame them, it's not like every one is completely honest with there resume. It didn't phase me a bit when I was quized at my last interview.
Parent
Re:Not that I'd ever side with MS... (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Not that I'd ever side with MS... (Score:5, Interesting)
The interview was a full day affair, with very few breaks. They said in the AM that I may or may not be finished at lunch, basically - they said that if I was a total idiot then they wouldn't waste anyone's time after lunch.
All of the interviews involved writing code on a whiteboard in various languages. The code was reviewed for syntactical correctness as well as logical.
The first interviewer was really cool - she asked me to mock-up a battleship simulation in C# and laughed at me as I did a very bleary-eyed OOP model in C# of the Game object, the Player object etc... when really what she was after was the validation logic for putting the ships on the board - ensure they are in bounds and don't hit other ships etc... to me that seemed completely worthless - I mean that just an algorithm you would work out and tweak, the important stuff is your class structure.... but I digress.
I walked out of that interview feeling pretty good until I got in the next one. It was horrible - the interviewer was very arrogant and rude and had a thick accent which made him difficult to understand. He would ask me a question, and sit and roll his eyes as I was answering and check his email - basically communicating clearly to me that he didn't like me, want me there or want to be talking to me. For a code sample, he asked me to write code in C# (on a whiteboard) that would traverse a tree of nodes and print out the values in order of all nodes at an arbitrary level. So I wrote a recursive function that would do what he wanted, and that would work just fine. He didn't like that way I had written it, and demanded that I rewrite it "more efficiently". I stood there for like 20 mins feeling like a total idiot because I couldn't figure out what he was talking about, until he got mad and said I should be using "queues" and that it would be more efficient. I had no idea what he was talking about and told him, and he came up and tried to explain that I could have used a FIFO queue - but looking at his example, I didn't understand how his approach would have been any more efficient than mine - when I asked him this, he just got angrier and said it was. Suffice to say, that interview didn't go so well. I realized as soon as I was done with him that I wasn't going to get the job, so I resolved to just have some fun and enjoy the rest of the day. As an interesting footnote, I kept thinking about the question, and a couple days later I did find a much more efficient way of doing it, but it had nothing to do with queues, and it would have been much faster than either of the methodologies we had discussed. I damn near emailed him the better solution, but figured "Whats the point?" Ah well, like I say I was not at my best.
My next interview was with a guy who asked me a different technical question involving organizational hierarchies. I was lucky in that interview because I had written a budget system for a bank that used a similar structure, so I had found a very clever solution to the exact problem he asked me. When I explained my whiteboard code, he got a "damn this guy is good" look in his eye, so I felt pretty good coming out of that one.
Next was a lunch interview, a guy who that said would be my "peer" took me to lunch and asked me a bunch of questions while I was eating. The questions he asked were ridiculous, I mean stuff straight out of the MCSD Analyzing Solutions test. Seriously, I'm pretty sure he pulled a couple test questions before our lunch interview. He would ask me something, and I would answer him with a couple ways that I had solved the problem in the real world, and then he would say "no, that's no the answer, the answer is Scalability, Maintainability, Performance and....
Parent
You Kinda Deserved It (Score:5, Interesting)
However, had you recalled Breadth-First-Search, you'd realize that with a queue you could traverse the the tree one level at a time, starting with the root and adding all children found on each level. This explicitly stores in queue the information you implicitly programmed in the recursion. It requires more thinking, but it saves the costly recursive calls, which can pile up very quickly if you're searching an unbalanced tree. You were lazy and neglected algorithmic analysis for the easy recursive solution and got rightly burned for it. This may have happened because you were tired, and that's certainly understandable, but this is early CS/basic algorithms material, and if I was your interviewer I'd also be concerned (but less of a dick about it).
Parent
Re:Not that I'd ever side with MS... (Score:5, Insightful)
With an opener like that, my expectation would be that they already had a good handle on my skill set through a referral, my published work, or some other means. Here's a dating analogy: You see an attractive woman at a bar, and offer to buy her a drink, complementing her good looks. Then you ask if she has any photos of her relatives, because you want to be sure that if you eventually breed, your offspring won't be ugly. Wouldn't you expect a slap in the face?
Parent
I'd side with people who RTFA (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Not that I'd ever side with MS... (Score:5, Insightful)
And how many times have
Further, some of these technical interviews are there to identify if a person has the skills for a specific job. Somebody can have a PhD in chemical engineering and published articles on polymers, so would sound like a wonderful candidate. However, they may not fit into the specific job because they focused on polymer reaction simulation, and not on high temp polymer behavior, or understand the mechanical properties.
Parent
Re:Not that I'd ever side with MS... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you were interviewing Codd for a database gig, would you grill him on manhole covers & mysql syntax?
Parent
Re:Not that I'd ever side with MS... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually Microsoft is testing how quickly you can come up with a solution to a problem they have presented you with.
Judging by their products, this should be a valuable skill at Microsoft.
If you were looking for a job that required long term dedication to complete a goal and the ability to coordinate many tasks at the same time in order to achieve something coherent and complete, then you would consider the ability to achieve a Phd. in Computer Science, along with the track record of the candidate.
No, Microsoft doesn't operate that way. Sell a faulty product to the customer, get a list of problems back, dole out the list to employees, put the fixes in patches, lather, rinse, repeat.
Microsoft is trying to recruit the people who come up with a quick fix, not the people who think long term. Their recruiting techniques seem to be in line with their development techniques.
If you want long term thinking, go work for IBM's mainframe division.
Parent
Re:PhD in CS is WAY overrated (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:PhD in CS is WAY overrated (Score:5, Funny)
My ph.d. isn't in CS (I don't do any programming) but I think the answer is ``shoot the hostage."
Parent
Re: PhD in CS is WAY overrated (Score:5, Insightful)
> What, you think because you have a PhD, your feces doesn't stink? Guess what -- it does.
> When I worked for a particular company, we instituted a "programmer intelligence test". It didn't test nonsense like "Define Polymorphism", it had questions where they actually had to think like a programmer. I found that the more educated the person, the worse they did on the test!
I don't suppose it occurred to you that there's more to CS than programming.
Did you give these educated people a chance to ask you some questions that require thinking like a PhD?
Parent
Former Microsoftie here (Score:5, Insightful)
However.... Microsoft IMO has a big problem. On one hand they keep saying that they want "out of the box thinkers" and on the other hand, they want a fair degree of conformity regarding playing politic, etc. So these pop quizes (which are often anything but technical) are just a way to pretend to satisfy the first demand while really satisfying the former.
Out of all the interviews I had, I only had one that was technically worth *anything.* In no other case did I feel like I could really have an intelligent technical conversation with the interviewer. So yes, I think that their interview skills need some work.
Parent
Re:You can smell the arrogance in the air! (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if it was poor, the company would need to sell itself to me. Thats what the interview process is for- for both sides to sell themselves. I need to convince the other company that they want me. They need to convince me that I will enjoy working there. If we don't both convince the other, we each try again.
Parent