I don’t like this approach because it doesn’t provide measurable or repeatable criteria for comparing candidates. It also suffers from a sort of Gell-Mann amnesia where a candidate who spouts good-sounding BS about a topic you’re not familiar with is assumed to be competent across the board.
The process is repeatable. We ask all candidates for the same role the same questions and ask them to do the same technical tasks. The other component of our technical interview has something more similar to scoring.
We’ve found that this diagram exercise is actually a lot harder to BS your way through because the expectation is that we’re going to probe into your answers and it’s supposed to be something you understand well.
