Self-complacency v.s. confidence

Recently, I've interviewed a candidate who applied for Sr. software engineer job and he did demonstrate an unusual character of Taiwanese engineer: self-complacency. 

The interview started from a quick technical review to know his skill set base on his resume.

At first, we quickly ask "How do you identify your Linux skills" and he said "I am very good at Linux". Then we ask a few basic Linux commands, for example: "How to know your current disk usage?". "How to know current Linux kernel version". He actually cannot answer much.

Then, we asked "How do you identify your level of SQL?" and again he said "I am very good at SQL". But he actually don't know any basic concept of "outer join" and "normalization". He explained SQL is what he is working on not the scope of his research area. Then we asked "how to avoid SQL injection in application" but he still can't say anything.

Since his resume said that he is "excellent" in English, we asked if we can continue interview in English. He took a deep breathe and then said "no".

Finally, he explained that he can quickly learn "anything" in one month but then forget that in next month. But he still emphasized that "I think I do have the talent of software development, give me a mission and I can commit the code". This might be true that he can learn "anything" quick and "commit code" for the job. But it is definitely also true that no one will hire such risky engineer.

To me, at first, I think it is extremely unusual to see an engineer with 7 years experience has such self-complacency and with such low actual skill set. But then his resume shows that he worked for 6 different companies in past 7 years. Change job doesn't means that the candidate is bad. But it is still a sign for Taiwanese programmer. Another sign is that he did have very good education background and also good delivery in first 2 jobs. But then, he seems stay in there. 

How to distinguish  self-complacency from self-confidence?

We do want engineers have confidence to take challenges. But how can we tell a candidate has confidence or just too complacency? 

During interview, our suggestions are

(1) Check skills by fact

Ask simple, un-ambiguous technical questions. Do not rely on his words on resume. For example, if his resume shows he has 10 years experience in Linux Operation, make sure you will ask at least 3 most simple questions and 5 middle level questions. If his resume says that he has 10 years in Java, make sure ask the last moment of his java coding. Sometime, the answer will surprise you.

(2) Check experience by real actions

Some candidates described experience like this "design XXXX system". This could be very important task but also could be a self-complacency thing in candidate's mind.

If this candidate lead design meeting, come out a design document - even a hand writing document or drawing picture from whiteboard. That means we can check the design and know how many of "special" things inside the design. 

However, if candidate couldn't say any concrete delivery (we don't need to ask him to provide right away, just want to know if there is), then it is very possible that he "believe" that he did the design job but actually the design was inside his mind. 

You need to heck the actual actions and delivery of it. You can ask "please let me know the exactly things you did on design XXXX system and also the delivery at that time"

(3) Find critical point by the actions candidates did

Always looking for fact of candidates did in previous jobs. It is very similar to (2). We will need to understand his behavior via his previous actions when face a critical situation.

However, I am sure everybody will prepare a pretty nice answer of "why you leave your current company". So just save your time, ask other question.

Check candidate's resume and you will always find some critical moment in his career. For example, a project which requires a new skill set, then you can ask how candidate learn new skills. Or, senior engineer might play leaders role in certain situation, then, you can ask what is the worst thing happened during his leading. 

Always Consider Facts

In short, always consider to gather fact during interview and identify if candidate fit your organization through fact, not to guess.

中高階人才選用：成長心態鑒別的技巧

或許Carol Dweck這名字有點陌生，但是這位1946年出生的教授與她指導的學生(Lisa S. Blackwell, Kali H. Trzesniewski 這兩位才是研究作者，教授是列為共同作者) ，闡述的學習成長理論，卻經常的出現在教育界與職場上。

簡單的說，根據對美國小朋友的實驗，鼓勵「成長作為」比鼓勵「天賦能力」更能讓小朋友學習快，解決問題更有彈性，獲得更好學習效果。說的更直白一點，要多對小朋友說：「你做的很努力唷，好棒棒」「你做的方式很有創意耶，好棒棒」，千萬不要對小朋友說：「你好聰明唷，好棒棒」「你好厲害喔，好棒棒」。研究者把小朋友的內心，分成兩種心態(mindset)：成長心態growth mindet，以及，固定心態fixed mindset。說的更直白一點，這些研究認為擁有成長心態的小朋友，未來的發展無限，人生就是彩色的。由於這個研究，引發了之後的更多類似相關研究，對於教育者而言，某些過去鼓勵方式，反而可能對小孩子有錯，而後，這些研究者，成立了 Mindset Works公司，開始賣服務與各類教材。

各企業巫醫們，自然能從中獲得啟發。比較好的像是lifehack，所做的此圖也還真的有啟發性。

對於企業組織要選用中高階人才，自然會希望找到「具有成長心態」的而且「很有能力」的人。換言之，就是要找在龜兔賽跑中，早就已經跑很快，而且也謙虛向學的兔子！對於已經具有十多年工作經驗的老江湖，確蠻有可能在面試過程中，不著痕跡的隱藏自己。那麼企業要如何找到具有「成長心態」的人才，而非找到「很會面試隱惡揚善」的人才？

當然企業不可能重複一次Dr Dweck的實驗，不過確可以用情境實例面試精神，找到簡單的三個「事實」來鑒別人才。

請緊記情境實例面試的原則：了解此人過去的經驗與能力，而非此人「對未來的憧憬與幻想」。換言之，企業組織雖然是為了未來，才需要雇用人才。但是，鑒別人才確必須要依賴了解這位候選人「過去的事實」。

1. 困難問題實例：最近2,3年來，解決最艱困的工作方面問題是什麼，自己如何解決？

這個問題必須要問的簡單清晰。畢竟一個有10多年工作經驗者，必然會遇到困難問題，而既然是最艱難的問題，必然有下列幾種狀態，確實問出幾種客觀狀態，來鑒別此候選者的成長心態。

(a) 問題的艱難程度：不能太過簡單無聊的問題
(b) 此人對此問題的獨立貢獻程度：也就是是這個人「做」的，而不是他「叫別人做」。
(c) 問題解決方式的創意：這和下一題可能有關，但艱難的問題不見得要用創意的方式解決。

如果是資訊科技產業，這個問題要修改為「技術相關的艱困問題」。

2. 創意問題實例：最近5年內，對組織做出最有創意的貢獻是什麼？

此問題的基本精神在於，一個具有成長心態的人才，一定是會做出有創意的貢獻。當然也不可能每天都有創意，把時間放長為五年，應該已經很寬鬆。必然要透過這個問題，以及接下來的對話，確實問出以下客觀狀態：

(a) 這個創意，是此候選人「做」的，而不是他「叫」屬下做，或者是「建議」別人做的。
(b) 這個創意，範圍夠大，確實有所貢獻。
(c) 這個創意貢獻是否能有實質證明。

3. 失敗問題實例： 在工作上，做過最爛最失敗的事情是什麼。

雖然這是面試的老問題，但此問題必須按照事實，看出是否有「避重就輕」。特別是，許多工作十幾年的人，在職場都可以歷練出舌燦蓮花的本領。因此要檢查幾個事實狀態：

(a) 問題的嚴重性：確實有些人運氣特別好，工作十幾年都沒犯錯過。但這個機率實在太低，當一個候選人簡單的講一些根本不是失敗的例子，大概就只是避重就輕。面試時，可以簡單值說：說這些失敗其實根本不重要，能否在舉一個「嚴重犯錯失敗」的例子。另外也有可能是，其過去十幾年來工作內容太不重要，以至於沒有嚴重失敗的經驗。

(b) 失敗的歸咎責任：詢問問題時，一開始請讓候選人自行暢所欲言，許多固定心態(fixed mindset)的人，在能夠暢所欲言的時候，自然而然的會把責任轉移到非自我本身。例如：「那時候我們的QA根本沒找到問題，所以後來系統出錯的時候...」或者是「當時我們的人力不夠，所以就只能拖延...」

(c) 事後的影響：成長心態的人，對於重大失敗會有決定性的影響，因此，這個失敗事件，能否對他後來的「行為」「想法」有改變才是重點。

固定心態的人，很有可能會說「以後運氣還不錯 就沒發生同樣的事情了」或者「也就是因為如此 所以我才想離職」，更慘的是，規避了解失敗的真正原因，特別是曾經當過主管的失敗例子：「因為之前的屬下太過自由導致出問題，所以我現在就很嚴格管理所有細節」「那時候跑scrum有很多問題，所以現在都不用scrum了」。

成長心態的人，則比較傾向找到失敗的真正因素，改善真正因素：「那時候跑scrum有某某問題，所以我們現在scrum會做XX調整」。而重大失敗，更是會變成具有成長心態的人，隱含的內心記錄的一部分。