Real-time feedback: My closing move in every interview
An engineering manager advocates for giving direct positive and constructive feedback to candidates at the end of interviews to clear up misunderstandings.
summary is enough The short post outlines a controversial interview tactic, but the comment thread provides a masterclass in why springing unsolicited feedback on trapped candidates backfires.
summary
The author argues that interviewers should spend the final minutes sharing blunt, opinionated feedback and concerns with candidates, giving them a chance to defend or clarify misunderstandings. While the author claims candidates are overwhelmingly grateful for this transparency, the practice aims to convert a one-way judgment into a collaborative dialogue. However, critics strongly argue this approach leverages an inherent power imbalance, masquerades poor real-time interviewing as mentorship, and risks cornering stressed candidates.
key points
- The author shares specific positive and constructive feedback examples from his experience conducting over a thousand tech interviews.
- He claims this tactic occasionally allows candidates to successfully clarify misunderstandings, salvaging otherwise borderline evaluations.
- HN commenters heavily push back, noting that candidates cannot freely decline feedback or safely disagree due to the extreme power asymmetry.
who should read it
Engineering managers, hiring leaders, and software engineers interested in interview dynamics.
discussion hostile
consensus
Commenters overwhelmingly reject the practice, arguing it exploits the power imbalance between interviewer and candidate and serves more as an ego trip than helpful mentorship.
pushback
A few commenters note that traditional interview feedback is frustratingly opaque, though almost none defend the author's specific execution.
> Ok. It’s not really a question. The ‘is that ok’ isn’t really seeking permission; it’s giving the candidate a few seconds to prepare for what’s coming.
The first rule for a manager when asking if someone is ready to hear feedback is accepting a no[1].
Posing it as a question when it isn't, immediately negates the validity of what follows. It says, "I'm not taking you input as worthy of consideration," and everything that follows it is hinged on this impotency.
If you're not willing to accept someone's input in the form of a 'no,' it's inconceivable that you'd expect others to take …
It highlights the fundamental hypocrisy of asking a candidate 'is that ok' for feedback while refusing to accept a 'no'.
Generated by an LLM from the article and thread. Check the sources before relying on it.