Soldato
This isn't a situation I find myself in currently however it did happen to me a couple of years ago and I'd be keen to seek other opinions if only for the purpose of discussion rather than for any tangible reason.
Two years I interviewed for a role for a large UK company seeking an "Email technical specialist" - Think SPF, DMARC, DKIM, Email Feedback Loops and you get the idea. I work and had worked up to this point, in relatively specialised IT security roles so the subject matter was no stranger to me.
As with any interview, I was fully expecting some simple technical questions to ensure I'd not walked in off the streets so when they threw "What ports does SMTP use" and "What is port 143" used for I knew what they were trying to achieve.
After about 50 minutes the interview seemed to be reaching its natural climax and one of the "techies" left the room. We, one of the mangers and I, were just standing up to leave when another stakeholder entered the room, apologised for being late and seemed very keen to repeat the interview process. He explained how crucial emails were to their business, how they'd historically had problems delivering emails to certain ISPs and what my experience to date was with such issues.
I discussed, from a high-level point, why they might be having some of the issues they were facing but he seemed very keen on specific examples and what I'd do "on day one" to fix the issues. At this point, I was conscious that there's a distinction between 'prove you know the subject matter' and 'tell us how to fix the issues for free'. If memory serves me correctly I think I said something along of the lines of being more than happy to suggest solutions but not in so much detail as to render the position and therefore interview null and void.
So has anyone else taken part in interviews which have blurred the lines between standard questions and free consultation for the company concerned?
Two years I interviewed for a role for a large UK company seeking an "Email technical specialist" - Think SPF, DMARC, DKIM, Email Feedback Loops and you get the idea. I work and had worked up to this point, in relatively specialised IT security roles so the subject matter was no stranger to me.
As with any interview, I was fully expecting some simple technical questions to ensure I'd not walked in off the streets so when they threw "What ports does SMTP use" and "What is port 143" used for I knew what they were trying to achieve.
After about 50 minutes the interview seemed to be reaching its natural climax and one of the "techies" left the room. We, one of the mangers and I, were just standing up to leave when another stakeholder entered the room, apologised for being late and seemed very keen to repeat the interview process. He explained how crucial emails were to their business, how they'd historically had problems delivering emails to certain ISPs and what my experience to date was with such issues.
I discussed, from a high-level point, why they might be having some of the issues they were facing but he seemed very keen on specific examples and what I'd do "on day one" to fix the issues. At this point, I was conscious that there's a distinction between 'prove you know the subject matter' and 'tell us how to fix the issues for free'. If memory serves me correctly I think I said something along of the lines of being more than happy to suggest solutions but not in so much detail as to render the position and therefore interview null and void.
So has anyone else taken part in interviews which have blurred the lines between standard questions and free consultation for the company concerned?
