What do we hate in job interviews?

We all went on interviews, talked with representatives of companies and constantly meet with the features that recruiters either cultivate, teach each other, or do not pay attention, but at the same time look repulsive - from the person who came to the company. In my 10-year career, I changed about 10 companies (in the latter - Luxoft - already 3 years, so I ended the practice of defector). And during this time I spent about 100 interviews on the side of the applicant, and about 150 - on the side of the interviewer, which gave me the opportunity to collect Top5 mistakes of recruiters who can spoil the interview so that I no longer want to go to the company.

Physical discomfort

Sometimes the room is not very comfortable temperature or stuffy (it even smells like sweat from a previous applicant). Moreover, when it is cold (air conditioning - right above your head) - this is especially bad, because the brain begins to occupy itself with thoughts:

1. Now I will begin to sneeze ... Oh, I will begin ... If I sit here like this for a long time, then I can’t get out of my current job tomorrow. It will be hard ... Why is she talking about the company for so long, I’m not particularly interested, I’ll get so sick.
2. Oh, oh, oh ... I hope they understand that I am shivering from the cold, and not from the fact that I worry
3. What do they have with ventilation? Do I also have to work? And if my place is just under their conditioners?
4. Well, gut, additional questions ... That went snot ... Are you serious? Am I going to be snooping here, right at the interview? * level of nervousness increases dramatically * How would you snot so snot so that she did not hear?

You say: why don’t you tell them? Well, sometimes people just keep silent because they are on foreign territory.
')

Room size

The interview room is small, the table is small and as a result is a short distance to the recruiter. While we have not met closer, I do not know you and my animal instincts ask to be at such a distance, so that you can be comfortable to hear and see, but you could not, stretching out your hand, put it in front of me. A small room suggests that the company does not have such big budgets as it wants to show. If the room is not cleaned at the same time - this is a special tin. The first interview should be conducted in a large negotiation to create a sense of freedom. At the big table. Small conversations (and they, of course, will be) - under the last interview, when a person is already breathing with the desire to get into the company.

From my experience: somehow I was interviewed at one "international company with offices around the world." Interviewed me in a small triangular room. It is triangular. This conversation is clearly cut off from the corridor. So, moreover, that the shape of the room was “oppressive”, so also all the walls were wiped with something like rubber marks from a striking shoe. The lighting in the meeting room was muffled, as was the case in the entire office, which in general created an oppressive mood. As it turned out later, this company from time to time considered it normal for employees to delay salaries of several months.

Interrogation

If there is an interview with technical experts, it is impossible for them to come person 5, for example. You are in a foreign territory, talking to people who appreciate you "are you so good to continue to talk with you." Everyone is opposite and they look at you like a clown in a circus and wait for you to stumble and fall off a running tiger so that, if possible, you can quickly interrupt the conversation and get back to work. If there are many such people, the pressure is very high. And in general, the desire to communicate and go on disappears, even if this interview you pass.

Moreover, an interview with such a large number of people is more similar to showing them off to each other: who will have the question behind them? They are colleagues who want to seem smarter than they really are. And their questions are more likely directed not to you, but to other colleagues, so that they think: “Oh, Lucifer, what kind of chips does he know.” And he grabs with the one who interviews for the position.

UPD After the discussion in the comments, I agree that I got a little excited here and there are cases when it is right and does not contradict common sense. However, this, in any case, must be warned strongly in advance so that the person is psychologically prepared. Not everyone can sit quietly during the interrogation of several development teams.

Traces of the former

Paper must be clean. The paper from the previous interview - removed. When I communicate with a girl, I understand that I am not her first. And not even the second, most likely. But I am not pleased to see the "footprints" that were next to me. Likewise, I am not pleased when there are leaves with solutions from the previous interview. This was what I had often and “distorted” each time. It was especially not pleasant when the person was too lazy to go for the paper and I wrote the solution on the other side of the leaf, which someone had already used. Is your big ultra firm so bad with paper?

When a lover of logic puzzles interviews

There are too many logic tasks. In my opinion, if you want to ask them so much, take a couple and that's it. When asked a lot of puzzles, it seems that you are taken to the club of chess-mathematicians. Talking about a vacancy is multifaceted and the adequacy of the interlocutor can be understood without 4-6 logic tasks and dwarfs.

On this option I have my own story. Somehow I was on a meeting in one "big company with foreign assets" and the director of the company interviewed me. It was a pain. Logic puzzles are solved easily and simply when you know the answer in advance. And when you don’t know, but really decide, firstly you start to annoy you by deciding too long (yeah, you found the solution yourself in Google), and secondly, after the 2nd task + of the previous conversation, the brain begins to boil. So this uncle gave me three tasks that I did and after that he gave me a fourth one. My head went to hibernate, and my eyes turned glassy. After waiting for me for about 15 minutes, the director said that I thought for too long and, as he believes, not too smart for them to work. And you know ... I expressed everything I think about him. I did it for the first and last time in my life. In the sense that more such flow of tasks did not meet.

Questioning

This way to learn as much as possible about a person comes from HR methods of conducting interviews. In general, the problems faced by HRs are understandable. After all, we are many. And having spent no more than an hour for each and we need to understand our human soul and, as a result, make a conclusion: whether our psychological portrait is suitable for a team (which they do not know) and a vacancy. To achieve this goal, they were developed by some and learned by thousands of other questionnaire methods, when the answers to the questions make it clear how our soul is woven and whether we are an ideal candidate for their vacancy.

However, when I meet the profile, I want to turn around and leave. In my opinion, when a questionnaire is given, it is somehow said to a person: “We have so much of you that we don’t have to work with every time. Here, fill in the "filter idiots" so that we do not speak with the most unworthy. And yes, you will have to come again later. This is so, the questionnaire, and the interview will be later! And that's why the hunt is gone. Because you understand that you will fill out forms for their database for them, that this is a waste of time ... And that, perhaps, if you now agreed to meet with another company, you would not waste time on this.

I propose to improve the practice of HRov, writing what you personally hate - in the comments.