• ricecake@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    I actually kinda agree with both here.

    It sucks working with someone who is utterly disinterested in the work, if it’s anything above rote work.
    Asking the candidate what they found interesting about it is at least a basically fine idea. If they can’t answer when you ask, that actually is kinda concerning.
    Big difference between asking and expecting them to volunteer the information.

    At the same time, if the people interviewing you can’t even pretend to show basic conversational courtesy by asking some basic “what do you do for fun” style questions or anything that shows they’re gonna be interested in the person they’re looking to work with, that’s a major concern.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      24 hours ago

      I disagree because most people are applying for everything. So many people are putting in dozens of applications a day. “What resonated with you” is the fact that they’re hiring at all. You can learn to love a job and find satisfaction in the work even if the company didn’t “resonate” with you.

      • Necroscope0@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        Right? What resonated? Well it mostly the need to not starve to death and have a roof over my head. What about you?

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Sure. I wouldn’t disqualify someone for being ambivalent towards what we’re working on, but the person who seems interested is gonna be better to work with.

        Likewise when looking for a place to work, if the tangibles are equivalent I’ll prefer the place with better intangibles.

        I’m not in HR or management, so I don’t care about cost effectiveness or productivity beyond “not screwing me over”. From that perspective, it’s generally nicer to work with someone who finds it interesting than with someone who doesn’t.

        There’s no point asking “why do you want to work here”, because the answer is obviously a combination of money and benefits, and how food and healthcare keeps you from being dead.
        I can’t fault an interviewer who’s clearly trying not to ask the obvious question and instead actually ask how the candidate feels about the work instead of disqualifying them for not volunteering the right answer.

        It’s not unreasonable for an employer to ask a candidate how they feel about the work anymore than it’s unreasonable for the candidate to ask about the working environment.