A few weeks ago, a UK woman named Olivia Bland caught a bus to a job interview.
It was for a travel software company, and Olivia was nervous.
Two hours later, Olivia found herself at a bus stop in tears, shocked and distressed by what she had just encountered.
So, what happened in between?
It would seem Olivia was subjected to what has been termed the ‘stress interview‘; a situation designed to intimidate, upset, embarrass and provoke an interviewee.
The theory is that the stress interview tests resilience, particularly for the ‘snowflake’ millennial generation who have a reputation of falling to pieces in the face of a crisis.
The young woman said, via Twitter, that she was humiliated by the company’s CEO. She says she was told why she “wasn’t good enough,” called an underachiever, and was asked excessively personal questions.
“I would like to thank you for the offer, but I have decided to decline,” Olivia wrote in an email that has since gone viral.
“The interview process yesterday was very uncomfortable for me. I understand the impact that Craig was trying to have, but nobody should come out of a job interview feeling so upset that they cry at the bus stop.
“There is something very off to me about a man who tries his best to intimidate and assert power over a young woman, and who continues to push even when he can see that he’s making somebody uncomfortable to the point of tears.
Top Comments
I would never do a stress interview. That strikes me as just antisocial.
There's an important distinction between how someone can feel and how someone can be made to feel that I think hiring managers need to understand. We should not try to ensure that people are made to feel stupid or inadequate. We may press certain limits that *might* lead people to question their knowledge.
The one time I was made to feel stupid during an interview it was entirely unintentional. I was asked about a problem that was so far out of my expertise that I simply had nothing to offer. I didn't feel put down. I just felt like there was so much more to learn. The difference is that the interviewer periodically said that he didn't expect me to have direct knowledge. So I did my best to reason through the problems and it was a good fit.
Fast forward. I now conduct interviews. I often try to ask questions outside of the candidate's expertise because what I get out of it is how they approach unusual problems. Outstanding employees will admit to a lack of knowledge and still try to solve the problem. Our job is to offer some reassurance that it is ok if this is outside of the candidate's knowledge and also see how they respond to that reassurance. But I work in a business where the technical challenges are extraordinary and so we need to find people who can face very scary unknown situations without too many problems.
Some interviewers think too much about themselves no matter how big the company is and they forget that the person sitting opposite are here for an opportunity and its mutual. No employer is doing any favour to anyone in the world by hiring someone. Finding a company fit can be done in much better ways than intimidation. Being personally affected having been interviewed by one of the biggest brands, I feel its time companies need to respect and evaluate candidates through better methods.
There are more subtle versions of this too. I interviewed at a company a few years ago. It was a programming job. Feedback from them was that I thought before programming and that was bad. My thinking was that "this is how you get a 2 million line Perl codebase for your web site!" So the lack of fit was mutual....