Should I email my interviewer after the interview?

Streaky_Bacon

Gavin83 said:

Personally I’d be quite impressed if someone did this. I find in IT (I assume this is an IT post) there’s a subset of people who love to problem solve and they won’t rest until the problem is resolved. I’ve always found these people to be extremely valuable employees and I’d assume anyone sending follow up info would fit into this category. It also shows you’re good at researching.

I might be in the minority here though!

Whether or not you are in a minority, you are right.

This response is bang on, but it raises another issue.

OP, some people would think it is weird, and some people would think that you are a switched on, committed, problem solver, and would value that.

Which one do you want to work for?

The interview process is a two way street. They are trying the judge if you will be a good employee and you are trying to decide whether they will be a good employer, and it is often hard for both sides to get a real picture of the other.

Ask yourself this. You have gone the extra mile to look into this, in your own time, and send it to them. Clearly you are that kind of person.

If their response is, "who is this weirdo?", then do you think they are a good fit for you and your natural approach to problem solving?

I wish the OP the best, regardless of what they decide.

JamoLew

How can you be sure that it wasn't a question as part of the interview and they wanted to see if you knew what the solution was ?

You partially answered but not fully

I have interviewed on a few occasions and asked similar questions - how you answer on the day is based on your existing knowledge, not your ability to go and google the answer and put in a retrospective answer.

AskAsk

JamoLew said:

How can you be sure that it wasn't a question as part of the interview and they wanted to see if you knew what the solution was ?

You partially answered but not fully

I have interviewed on a few occasions and asked similar questions - how you answer on the day is based on your existing knowledge, not your ability to go and google the answer and put in a retrospective answer.

this is the problem.  if it was this way, then it would be very embarassing for the OP.  the interviewer would know exactly what he was up to, and may take a dislike to him.  the OP will argue that he is not up to anything, but is simply trying to help.  however, how many people do you know that does something simply because they are trying to help in these interview situations?

it could be that his additional info may be taken in a positive light, but i can't see how this can give him any credit over other candidates as it is something after the event.  interviews are all about how you perform on the day, and not after thoughts and investigative work after you have attended the interview.  the people who interviewed him will not be expecting him to go and find answers for them after the interview.  if they asked him any questions during the interview, it will be their expectation of his indepth knowledge, that he would or may know the answer.

Streaky_Bacon

JamoLew said:

I have interviewed on a few occasions and asked similar questions - how you answer on the day is based on your existing knowledge, not your ability to go and google the answer and put in a retrospective answer.

It does depend upon the question and upon whether not knowing the answer would show that you don't have the relevant experience.

If you're interviewing a pilot and they don't what the sticky out bits at the side are, then there is a problem and a later email with the answer won't look good.

We don't know what the question was, but the fact that it was a software problem, means that there is a good chance that it does not fall under the above category of question (i.e. one that revolves around knowledge that the candidate should know). It is equally as likely to be a question that falls under the "problem solving" category of question, and also "problem solving that might require research even from a competent practitioner".

There is rarely a single, absolute answer with software problems of any complexity.

If it is the former, then the OP will have already shown that they don't know it, so the issue is moot.

However, if it falls under the category of problem solving then, answering it later, shows the ability to research and utilise that knowledge in problem solving, and also having the desire to do so.

We can't know until we know the question, but there is nothing to be lost in either way.

MalMonroe

I wouldn't because it's just not appropriate.

Once I'd received the final (yay or nay) message, I may contact them for feedback if I'd not been successful but not before I received the result nor for the reason you say. It could be seen as trying to gain advantage over other interviewees (but you may also have got that anyway in spite of not being able to answer the question fully - you have no way of knowing). 

I have been both interviewee and interviewer in the past and in my role as interviewer, I would not have looked upon that kind of thing favourably.

There have been a few interviews where I've come out and thought I'd made a real hash and could have answered questions far better had my brain been more alert, I'm sure most people have done that too. But you just have to let it go. Interviewers do make allowances. 

[Also the person who made that particular query probably did his own investigative googling afterwards if it wasn't part of the interview. I would have, just out of curiosity. And I'm not even in IT.]

k12479

Streaky_Bacon said:

We don't know what the question was, but the fact that it was a software problem, means that there is a good chance that it does not fall under the above category of question (i.e. one that revolves around knowledge that the candidate should know). It is equally as likely to be a question that falls under the "problem solving" category of question, and also "problem solving that might require research even from a competent practitioner".

An issue here is that it's a blog post the OP has found. So all it demonstrates, in terms of knowledge or problem solving, is the most basic ability to use google, something that should be a given for any vaguely professional and certainly any IT job. If it's actually important to the company then they can easily use google too. So you are back to looking like trying to draw attention to yourself, under the pretence of providing (low-value) information.

robatwork

What's really "rude" here is you asking for opinions and taking umbrage at an opinion you don't share.

That person spent time posting their views, and you should thank them for it, even if they think it's "weird". They weren't insulting you and if you're that thin skinned you will spend a long time feeling insulted. Don't go near Reddit.

My opinion is that posting an answer to the question posed in interview that you have reflected on, and in your own words, would be acceptable. A link to a blog wouldn't send the right message.

Streaky_Bacon

k12479 said:

Streaky_Bacon said:

We don't know what the question was, but the fact that it was a software problem, means that there is a good chance that it does not fall under the above category of question (i.e. one that revolves around knowledge that the candidate should know). It is equally as likely to be a question that falls under the "problem solving" category of question, and also "problem solving that might require research even from a competent practitioner".

An issue here is that it's a blog post the OP has found. So all it demonstrates, in terms of knowledge or problem solving, is the most basic ability to use google, something that should be a given for any vaguely professional and certainly any IT job. If it's actually important to the company then they can easily use google too. So you are back to looking like trying to draw attention to yourself, under the pretence of providing (low-value) information.

It doesn't necessarily demonstrate that, depending upon the question.

Software developers do not necessarily "know" the answer to specific problem. What they are good at is understanding a problem and knowing how to go about searching for information, and how to use that to solve the problem. Part of that will very often involve internet research.

A bad software developer will be given a problem and try to solve it again from first principles. A good software developer will try to leverage existing knowledge to provide the solution. These days that knowledge is often on the internet. The key is knowing how to find it, and knowing how to use it.

Even with simple coding problems, some developers will spend a day trying to figure it out. A good developer will often go straight to the internet to see if somebody else has already coded a solution to the same problem.

Does the OP demonstrate any special ability to locate very relevant information and utilise it to solve a given problem?
Or did they just use an obvious keyword search to locate a somewhat relevant blog post and then forward that?
Depends upon the question, which we don't know.

Gavin83

AskAsk said:

k12479 said:

AskAsk said:

k12479 said:

AskAsk said:
...if the OP is really trying to help, without trying to gain anything from it, is to email the interviewer after the process has been completed whether he is successful or not.

I agree. If unsuccessful there's nothing to lose - worst case you might look weird, best case it might open the door to a different or later role with the organisation.

an interview is the time given for you to perform and get tested for the job.  after the interview, you no longer have this chance and so it seems a bit weird to me that a candidate is still trying to sit the interview!

the question may have been posed to test the OP and he only has a limited amount of time to give his answer.  that time has expired, so it would feel like someone saying after they have handed in their exam paper that they would like to take it back and add something to it.

Once again, I agree with you. I wouldn't do it, but if, as you say, the "OP is really trying to help" then an email following an unsuccessful outcome saying "thanks for the interview opportunity...by the way you mentioned x problem and I thought you might find this helpful..." doesn't have much of a downside other than looking weird and addressing a hypothetical/obsolete problem. 

i think you may have misunderstood my statement.  i said that the OP should not email the employer at this stage, but he can do so after the selection process has been completed as then there would be no doubt that he is only trying to help and not doing so to gain an advantage over other candidates.

Surely the whole purpose of the interview process is to gain an advantage over other candidates?

I think where we might differ in opinion here is when the interview process stops. You seem to believe it’s done once the interviewee leaves the room where as I think it’s over once the job offer is given and accepted. I doubt follow up contact will make a huge difference but if you’re deciding between two similar candidates it could be enough to swing it, although judging by this thread it could be in either direction!

AskAsk

Gavin83 said:

AskAsk said:

k12479 said:

AskAsk said:

k12479 said:

AskAsk said:
...if the OP is really trying to help, without trying to gain anything from it, is to email the interviewer after the process has been completed whether he is successful or not.

I agree. If unsuccessful there's nothing to lose - worst case you might look weird, best case it might open the door to a different or later role with the organisation.

an interview is the time given for you to perform and get tested for the job.  after the interview, you no longer have this chance and so it seems a bit weird to me that a candidate is still trying to sit the interview!

the question may have been posed to test the OP and he only has a limited amount of time to give his answer.  that time has expired, so it would feel like someone saying after they have handed in their exam paper that they would like to take it back and add something to it.

Once again, I agree with you. I wouldn't do it, but if, as you say, the "OP is really trying to help" then an email following an unsuccessful outcome saying "thanks for the interview opportunity...by the way you mentioned x problem and I thought you might find this helpful..." doesn't have much of a downside other than looking weird and addressing a hypothetical/obsolete problem. 

i think you may have misunderstood my statement.  i said that the OP should not email the employer at this stage, but he can do so after the selection process has been completed as then there would be no doubt that he is only trying to help and not doing so to gain an advantage over other candidates.

Surely the whole purpose of the interview process is to gain an advantage over other candidates?

I think where we might differ in opinion here is when the interview process stops. You seem to believe it’s done once the interviewee leaves the room where as I think it’s over once the job offer is given and accepted. I doubt follow up contact will make a huge difference but if you’re deciding between two similar candidates it could be enough to swing it, although judging by this thread it could be in either direction!

i would consider submitting information after the interview has been completed to be trying to gain 'unfair' advantage.