Comment by w10-1

Comment by w10-1 12 hours ago

2 replies

Yes, it is a death spiral; if you are to lead them, you have to know what to fix when, to avoid making things worse.

The solution is typically not just to fix their code. They got in over their heads by charging ahead and building something they'll regret, but their culture (and likely the interviewer personal self-regard) depends on believing their (current) tech leaders.

So yes, the interviewer is most comfortable if you chase and find the ball they're hiding.

But the leadership question is whether you can relieve them of their ignorance without also stripping their dignity and future prospects.

I've found (mostly with luck) that they often have a sneaking suspicion that something isn't right, but didn't have the tools or pull to isolate and address it. As a leader if you can elicit that, and then show some strategies for doing so, you'll improve them and the code in a way that encourages them that what was hard to them is solvable with you, which helps them rely on you for other knotty problems.

It's not really that you only live once; it's that this opportunity is here now and should have your full attention, and to be a leader you have to address it directly but from everyone's perspective.

Even if you find you'd never want to work with them, you'd still want to leave them feeling clearer about their code and situation.

cobbzilla 11 hours ago

I agree with everything you've written.

Clarifying my "YOLO" usage: I was being a little flippant, in the sense that when ending an interview early with direct critical feedback, the most likely outcome is a "burned bridge" with that company (you're never coming back).

Which reminds me one of my favorite twisted idioms: We'll burn that bridge when we get to it!

I guess I've finally found an acceptable real-world use case for this phrase :)