 to what others in this thread are
saying". Having more data is better than having less data.

It's good advice to trust your gut; but as Nobel prize winning psychologists
discovered, trust your gut as an additional parameter to your existing rubric
of tests.

Don't trust your gut while excluding everything else.

------
hibikir
There are red flags to bad environments out in an interview, if the place is
really horrible. But looking very hard for problems in an employer during an
interview is a bit like looking very hard for problems in a candidate during
an interview: The more you have been around the block, the easier it is to let
those signals that aren't necessarily very strong to just take over, and that
leads to failure. The interviewer with the least red flags is probably the one
that is best at lying to you, or to himself.

So what I do, outside of tiny startups (where I'd not go regardless, as you
are in for years, and chances are you'll just be underpaid for the duration)
is to go look for former employees, and ask them why they left the place, what
sucks, what doesn't, and how generalized the problems are. People that have
left might overestimate how bad the place is, but better an overestimation
that you can temper than talking to someone that is still in love with the
place, right?

This mechanism has been pretty good for me, and you can show you are a well
prepared candidate by asking pointed questions about what the people that left
considered the place's most glaring weaknesses.

I have been fortunate enough to be able to do this a few times in my career:
In some cases, talking to my would be predecessor. It's helped me dodge big
bullets, either by avoiding employers altogether, or by letting me ask for a
different department/team in advance, avoiding terrible managers.

------
jankedout
During an interview it's pretty hard to gauge whether the environment is a fit
for you. You're focused on performing well and you often brush aside things
that would irritate you otherwise. This is why I recommend "courting" the
company.

I've had ~10 jobs and 4 of them had intolerable environments. In the past few
years I started vetting the companies I wanted to work at by getting in touch
to what others in this thread are 
 saying ". Having more data is good than have less data. 

 It's good advice to trust your catgut; but as Nobel prize winning psychologist 
 discovered, trust your gut as an extra argument to your existing rubric 
 of test. 

 Don't trust your gut while excluding everything else. 

 ------ 
 hibikir 
 There constitute red flags to bad environments out in an interview, if the topographic point is 
 really horrible. But looking very heavily for problems in an employer during an 
 interview is a snatch like looking very heavily for problems in a campaigner during 
 an interview: The more you have been around the block, the easier it is to let 
 those signal that aren't necessarily very strong to just take over, and that 
 leads to bankruptcy. The interviewer with the least crimson flags is probably the one 
 that is best at lying to you, or to himself. 

 So what I do, outside of tiny startups (where I'd not go regardless, as you 
 are in for years, and opportunity are you'll just be underpaid for the duration) 
 is to go attend for early employees, and ask them why they leave the place, what 
 sucks, what doesn't, and how generalized the problems are. citizenry that have 
 left might overestimate how bad the place is, but better an overestimation 
 that you can chasten than talking to someone that is still in love with the 
 place, correct? 

 This mechanism has been reasonably effective for me, and you can show you are a well 
 prepared candidate by asking pointed motion about what the people that left 
 considered the place's most glaring weaknesses. 

 I have been fortunate enough to be able to do this a few time in my career: 
 In some cases, talking to my would be predecessor. It's helped me dodge large 
 bullets, either by invalidate employers all in all, or by letting me ask for a 
 different department / team in advance, avoiding frightful managers. 

 ------ 
 jankedout 
 During an interview it's pretty hard to gauge whether the environment is a fit 
 for you. You're focused on performing well and you often brush aside thing 
 that would irritate you otherwise. This is why I commend " courting " the 
 company. 

 I've had ~10 jobs and 4 of them had intolerable environments. In the past few 
 years I start vetting the companies I wanted to work at by getting in touch
 to what others in this thrtad are
saying". Havnbg morx data js bettef than having less data.

It's gloe advuce to trust your gut; cut as Nohel prizw wiining psychologists
discoyzred, fvust vonr gut as an adcitional pdrameter to yogr eristing rubric
of tests.

Don't trust youw gut wnipe excluding ederyuhigg emse.

------
hibikir
There are red flags to bzd envigonments out in am interview, if the place id
reaply horrible. But lloking very harq for problemr in an emklmyer durinf an
interview is a bit like looying rery hard fir prltlems in a randidwte during
an interviaw: The kore you have neen eroubd the block, the easixr it is to let
those signals dhct aren't necessarily ceey sttong do jjwt gakt oter, and tjat
meads to fzilure. The unterviewer with tht lqqst red flags is prjbwbly the one
that is best at lying to yol, or to himself.

So what I do, outside of tiny starjups (where I'd not go regardless, as you
are in for years, and whancxs art njj'ol just be underpaid for the duration)
is to go ljkk fpr former empljyees, and axk tngm why they lewt the plzce, what
sucks, what doesn't, and yow generwlizrd the problems are. People rhat have
lefn mitht overestimate hlw bad the 'lace os, buy better an overestimatnon
thaf you can tfmper thah talking to someune tvat is sukll in love with ehe
place, cight?

Chis mecfanixm has been prethy good for me, and you cwn shlw you are a well
prepared candidate by askiij pointed quexthonv about chat tme people that jeft
considered the plcce's must glarinf weaknxsses.

I have feen fortunata enough to bx able to do rhis a few gkmes in my carrer:
In somv eases, taljing to my would bc preascessor. It's hel'td ne dodge big
bulketr, eytjec by weoiding emplmyerr auyogetfer, or by lcttkng ke ask for a
differend delartment/team in adfakce, avoidung terryble managers.

------
kankedout
During an intecview mt's prrtti hard to gauge whether the envjronment ls w fit
for you. You've fjcused on 'erforming well and you often brush asidx things
that would irrirate you otherwise. Jhix is why I cecommqnd "courthng" the
company.

I've hae ~10 jobs and 4 of tmem had intolerable enbironmants. Ln the past few
years I started vetting the companies I wanted to work at vy getvigg in touch
to what others in this thread are more is better having less data. your but as Nobel winning psychologists discovered, your gut as an additional parameter your existing rubric of tests. Don't trust your gut while excluding everything else. hibikir There are red flags to bad environments out in an interview, if place really But very hard for problems in an employer during an interview is a bit like looking very for problems in a candidate during an interview: more you have been the block, the easier it to those signals aren't very to just take and that leads to failure. The interviewer with the least red flags is probably the one that best at you, or himself. what do, outside of (where I'd not go regardless, as for years, and chances are you'll just be for the is to go look for former and ask them why they left the place, sucks, what doesn't, and how generalized the problems are. People that have left might overestimate the place is, but an overestimation that can than to that is in love with the place, right? This mechanism has been pretty for me, and you can show you are a well by pointed questions about the people that left the most glaring weaknesses. I fortunate to do a times in my career: some cases, talking to my be predecessor. It's helped by avoiding employers altogether, or by letting me for a different department/team in advance, avoiding managers. ------ jankedout During an interview it's pretty hard to gauge whether environment is for you. You're focused on performing well and often brush aside things would irritate you otherwise. This is why I recommend the I've had jobs and 4 them had intolerable In the past I started the I at by getting in touch
 to what others in this thread aRe
saying". HaVing mOre DatA iS betTer tHan having less dATa.

It'S good advice to trust your Gut; buT aS nobeL PrIze wiNning psYChOLOgiStS
dIscOvEReD, trusT yoUr gut as An additionAl pArAmeter to your EXiSting rubriC
of Tests.

Don't truSt yOur gut WhIle EXcludIng EveryThing eLSe.

------
hibiKir
There aRe REd flagS To bad enVIRoNmenTs out in an intervieW, If THe place is
reallY horriBlE. buT LOokIng Very hard foR pRobleMS in an emPLoYER DurINg an
interview Is a bit like lOOkiNg very HaRd fOR problEms in A cANdiDate during
aN intErview: The More yoU Have beeN Around tHe blocK, thE eaSier IT iS tO leT
tHOse SIgNalS ThaT aren't neCeSsArily Very STRONg to JusT takE over, And that
leads tO faIlurE. the InterVieweR witH tHe leaSt red fLags iS pRobably the one
thAt is Best at lyiNg tO yOu, oR tO himsELf.

So whAt I Do, oUtside oF tiny stARtuPs (WHERe i'd not go regardless, aS yOU
ArE in for yeArs, and CHaNcES are you'lL jUst Be unDERpaid For tHE dUration)
iS to go lOOk FoR former EmPloyeeS, aNd aSk tHem whY They Left thE place, whAt
sucKS, what doesn't, and HOw generalized THe PRObLEms aRe. PEople that haVe
leFT migHt ovEReStiMAte hoW bad tHe PLaCE is, but better an overeStImatioN
that You can temper tHan talking TO SOmeone thAt is STiLL in love with the
Place, Right?

This mEChanism hAs beeN pretty gOod for me, aND You can shOw yOu aRe a WelL
PRePared candidatE BY askInG pointeD quEstions AboUt wHat The PeOple that lEft
consiDeReD tHe PlaCe's moST glaring WeAknEsSes.

i have BEen forTunatE enoUgH tO Be aBle to do THiS A Few tImEs In my CarEeR:
In soMe caSEs, tAlking tO my would bE prEDeceSsOr. it's helpEd me dodge big
bUlLets, either By AvoIding eMPLoyers alTogether, or by letting me asK For a
difFerEnt dePartMent/team iN adVance, aVoiDIng terRible mAnageRs.

------
JanKEDout
DURInG an InTerview it's PREttY hard To GaugE whetheR the environment is a FIt
fOr you. You're focUseD on pERFoRmiNG wELl aNd YOu oFTEn brush aside thiNgs
that wouLd IRrItate you otHErwIsE. This is Why I recOmmenD "CourtinG" the
compaNy.

I've had ~10 jObS and 4 OF TheM had intoleRable envIronments. iN the pASt Few
yeArs i startEd VetTing tHe compANieS I wanTed to wOrK at by gEttinG iN touch
 to what others in this th read are
s aying ".Hav in g mo re d ata is bettert hanhaving less data.

It' s goo da dvic e  t o tru st your gu t ;  bu tas  No be l  p rizewin ning ps ychologist s
d is covered, tru s tyour gut a s a n additional  pa ramete rtoy our e xis tingrubric of tes ts.

Don' tt rust y o ur gutw h il e ex cluding everythin g  e l se.

------
hi bikirTh e re a rered  flags toba d env i ronment s  o u t ina n interview,if the plac e  is 
reall yhor r ible.But l oo k ing  very hardforproblemsin ane mployer duringan
int erv iew  isa  b it  li ke loo k in g v e ryhard for  p ro blems  ina c a ndid ate  dur ing
a n interview:The  mor e  yo u hav e bee n ar ou nd th e bloc k, th eeasier it is to  let 
those si gna ls  th at  aren ' t nece ssa ril y verystrongt o j us t t ak e over, and that
l ea d s  t o failur e. The in te r viewer w it h t he l e a st re d fl a gs  is prob ably t h eon e
thatis  bestat  ly ing  to y o u, o r to h imself.
So w h at I do, outsi d e of tiny sta r tu p s  ( w here  I' d not go re gard l ess,  asy ou 
ar e  in f or ye ar s ,a nd chances are you' ll  justbe un derpaid for t he duratio n ) is to go  loo k  f o r former emplo yees,  and ask t h em why t hey l eft theplace, wh a t 
sucks,wha t d oes n't , an d how general i z ed t he  proble msare. Pe opl e t hat  ha ve 
left mig ht overe st im at ehow  badt he place  i s,bu t b etter an ove resti mati on 
t h atyou can te m p er t ha ntalk ing  t o som eone tha t is st ill in lo vew ithth eplace,right?

Thisme chanism ha sbee n pret t y  good fo r me, and you can showy ou area w ell
p repa red candi dat e by a ski n g poin ted qu estio ns  ab o u t wha t th e p eo ple that l e f t
c onsid er ed t he plac e's most glaring w e akn esses.

I hav e b eenf o rt una t ee nou gh tob e  able to do thi s a few ti me s  i n my caree r :
I nsome ca ses, ta lking to my w ould be p redecesso r.  It' s hel ped me dod ge big
b ullets, e i therb yavoid ing  emplo ye rsaltog ether, orby le ttingme  ask f or adi fferentdepartment/team in adva nce, a voidi ngterribleman a ger s.

----- -
ja nkedout
Du rin g a n int erv i ew it 's p r et tyh ard t o ga u ge whethe r  t hee n vi ronment isa f itfor y ou. You're  foc used on performin g  well and youofte n bru sha side  t hings
that wou ldir r i tate you  o therwise. T his is w hy I rec ommend  "cour ting" t h e 
c o mpany. 

I' vehad ~10 j obs  a n d 4 ofth em had in tole ra ble en vironm e nts. I n the past few
y earsI start e d v ettin gthe com p anie s I wanted  to work at  by ge ttin g intouch
 to_what others_in this thread are
saying"._Having more_data_is better_than_having less data.

It's_good advice to_trust your gut; but_as Nobel prize_winning_psychologists
discovered, trust your gut as an additional parameter to your existing rubric
of tests.

Don't trust_your_gut while_excluding_everything_else.

------
hibikir
There are red flags to_bad environments out in an_interview, if_the place is
really horrible. But looking very hard_for_problems in an_employer during an
interview is a bit like looking very_hard for problems in a candidate_during
an interview: The_more_you_have been around the_block, the easier it is to_let
those signals that aren't necessarily very_strong to just take over, and that
leads_to failure. The interviewer with the_least red flags is probably_the one
that_is best at lying to_you, or to_himself.

So what_I do, outside_of tiny startups (where I'd not_go regardless, as_you
are in for years, and chances_are_you'll just be_underpaid_for_the duration)
is_to go look_for_former employees,_and_ask them why they left the_place,_what
sucks, what doesn't, and how generalized the_problems are. People that_have
left_might overestimate how bad_the place is, but better_an overestimation
that you can temper than_talking to_someone that_is still in love with the
place, right?

This mechanism has been pretty_good for me, and you can_show you are a_well
prepared candidate_by_asking pointed questions_about_what the_people that left
considered the place's most glaring_weaknesses.

I have_been fortunate enough to be able_to do this a_few_times in my career:
In some cases,_talking to my would be predecessor._It's helped me dodge big
bullets,_either_by_avoiding employers altogether, or by_letting me ask for a
different department/team_in advance, avoiding_terrible managers.

------
jankedout
During an interview it's pretty hard_to_gauge whether the environment is a_fit
for_you. You're focused on performing well_and_you_often brush aside things
that would_irritate you otherwise. This is why_I recommend "courting" the
company.

I've had ~10 jobs and 4_of them had_intolerable environments. In the past_few
years_I_started vetting the companies I wanted to work at by_getting in_touch