[154626] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: job screening question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric J Esslinger)
Fri Jul 6 15:25:47 2012
X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: eesslinger@fpu-tn.com
From: Eric J Esslinger <eesslinger@fpu-tn.com>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:25:07 -0500
In-Reply-To: <3D1AE150-8B79-4E39-88C2-C651F0DE21A2@delong.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I've dealt with:
1, (yes, no comp, tablet, game console, or other device, other than non-int=
ernet capable HDTV. They had also just purchased our fastest service packag=
e. They got irate said were switching to our competitor, who were cheaper a=
nyway. Good news for them, we don't do minimum service contracts. Bad news =
for them, the competitor does. ) 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 also 'user has no power but =
computer is on UPS or generator and network gear is not'.
More than once in most cases.
Lots and lots of laptops with wireless card switch flipped to off accidentl=
y.
And while I've never had a user call because they are unable to access a we=
bsite because they are dead, I have had a non-user call/email about receivi=
ng NDR emails regarding email boxes belonging to one of our users we remove=
d after notification that the owner was deceased.
That's happened a few times. My call on dealing with that was something alo=
ng the lines of 'That email address has either been changed or the account =
associated with it disconnected, and we are not at liberty to discuss the i=
ssue further due to customer privacy policies' which is exactly what I say =
when the other possibilities are true.
Actually I had something similar to 'the user is dead'. Guy calls in to com=
plain his internet is down. We dig through our system, no record he's a cus=
tomer. After lots of hemming and hawing, admits he leeches unsecured wirele=
ss connection off next door neighbor. Next door neighbor's next of kin just=
had cable/internet turned off as she passed away, left power on while the =
move stuff out of house, so wireless signal was still present.
For a while I had 3 businesses in the same building that shared the same in=
ternet connection; However only one was listed on the account/paid the bill=
. Problem A) slow internet (metrics showing that their inbound or outbound =
is pegged, also the company paying bought the cheapest package available) P=
roblem B) Cross business compromising of information, printing stuff in oth=
er offices (two of them were even direct competitors, effectivly) sharing d=
rives across bussinesses, a virus outbreak that kept respreading through th=
e network because one office didn't seem to care they had a worm, and C) co=
mpany that owned/paid for connection had a tendancy to ignore late notices,=
because of billing schedule stuff the cutoff's would happen on Thursday, t=
he person at that company with the authority to write checks only worked Mo=
n-Wed
________________________________________
From: Owen DeLong [owen@delong.com]
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 1:53 PM
To: Keith Medcalf
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: job screening question
On Jul 6, 2012, at 11:41 AM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>
> My response would be "insufficient information provided for meaningful di=
agnosis".
>
> The following could be issues:
> ... the user does not have a computer
> ... the computer is not turned on
> ... the keyboard is not plugged in
> ... the user is a quadraplegic and cannot use the mouse or keyboard
> ... the user is blind and cannot find the computer
> ... the user has a computer but is not connected to a network
> ... the monitor is not turned on
> ... the brightness is turned down too far on the monitor
> ... the user is dead
I would argue that the fact the user filed a ticket/contacted the helpdesk/=
whatever to raise the issue indicates that the user probably isn't dead.
The rest are semi-legitimate somewhat amusing answers, but you missed many =
possibilities. When providing such a list of answers, always include an etc=
. at the end so as to indicate your understanding that the list is not comp=
lete. ;-)
> How does the user know that it cannot access the web site?
When did users become things?
Probably a candidate that made this mistake should be dismissed from consid=
eration on that basis alone.
Owen
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Matt Chung [mailto:itsmemattchung@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, 06 July, 2012 08:20
>> To: joseph.snyder@gmail.com
>> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: job screening question
>>
>> A former manager of mine once told me you can gauge a persons understand=
ing
>> by the questions they ask and I personally agree with this statement. Mo=
st
>> of us will be able to make a reasonable assessment of the person by
>> listening to the content of their questions. I'm not looking for an
>> immediate resolution, but trying to understand the thought process of th=
e
>> individual. I feel realistic scenarios provide some insight on the
>> individual's analytical skills.
>>
>> "A client cannot access the website "http://xyz.com". What do you do to
>> troubleshoot this issue?"
>>
>> Depending on the candidate, I've seen a variety of answers:
>> 1) "Can you ping the device?"
>> 2) "Can you access the gateway?"
>> 3) "What does the running config look like on the router"
>> 4) "Is there a firewall in between"
>>
>> I believe these questions may be asked in the right context provided the=
re
>> is enough information to isolate the issue to the network however the
>> statement is devoid of anything useful that would make the network suspe=
ct.
>> I would like to hear some questions such as:
>>
>> "are other websites accessible? Or is the only website the client is
>> experiencing issues with?"
>> "was the website working previously? when did it start happening?"
>> "what does the client see on their screen ? are they getting an error?"
>>
>> These questions reflect the persons ability to accurately understand the
>> problem before deep diving into the technical details. From there, you c=
an
>> get more technical. "Client is receiving an HTTP 404 error." Great, rule
>> out network since this is an application layer response...
>>
>> just my .02.
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 8:28 AM, <joseph.snyder@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree. Let the person talk do a few probing questions based off what
>>> they say. If you yourself have any value you should be able to tell if =
they
>>> have a chance.
>>>
>>> Also I would prefer someone who says I don't know for sure but maybe
>>> something along these lines, and then wants to know the right answer.
>>> Passion is also important, if you are willing to hire someone who is in=
it
>>> for just a paycheck, save yourself the headache and get a contractor.
>>> --
>>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>
>>> Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@hezmatt.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 11:04:05PM -0400, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
>>>> Diogo Montagner <diogo.montagner@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> For screening questions (for 1st level filtering), IMO, the questions
>>>>> has to be straight to the point, for example:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) What is the LSA number for an external route in OSPF?
>>>>>
>>>>> This can have two answer: 5 or 7. So, I will accept if the candidate
>>>>> answer 5, 7 or 5 and 7. Later on (the next level of the interview), a
>>>>> techinical interviewer will chech if the candidate understand the
>>>>> differences of LSA 5 and 7.
>>>>
>>>> Frankly, this feels a bit like asking what the 9th byte in an IP
>>>> header is used for (it's TTL, but who's, uh, counting?) -- "That's why
>>>> God gave us packet analyzers" should be counted as an acceptable
>>>> answer. If not, you'll find yourself skipping over plenty of
>>>> extremely well qualified candidates in favor of those who have crammed
>>>> recently for some sort of exam in hopes of compensating for their
>>>> short CV.
>>>
>>> Ugh, I know someone (thankfully no longer a current colleague) who arde=
ntly
>>> *defends* his use of questions like "what does the -M option to ps do?"=
on
>>> the basis that "any senior person who knows what they're doing should k=
now
>>> all the options to ps!". No, you useless tit, anyone who knows what the=
y're
>>> doing should know how to read a bloody manpage.
>>>
>>> Trivia tests get you hiring people who know trivia. Knowing trivia has =
it's
>>> productivity benefits, but if you can't apply it, it's useless.
>>>
>>> - Matt
>>>
>>> --
>>> Politics and religion are just like software and hardware. They all suc=
k,
>>> the documentation is provably incorrect, and all the vendors tell lies.
>>> -- Andrew Dalgleish, in the Monastery
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -Matt Chung
>
>
>
This message may contain confidential and/or proprietary information and is=
intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any us=
e by others is strictly prohibited.
