ISO standards

[j4]

If you were trying to recruit an Information Systems Officer, as per  this job spec, what questions would you want to ask them in a technical interview?

Just, you know, wondering, out of curiosity, like.

Comments

[caramel-betty.livejournal.com]

The marketing test is nothing special. It's usually just a print-out of a recent-ish copy of the corporate websites' front pages. Our group (documentation) has to balance the concerns of marketing on one hand (who want whizzy shiny things), designers on the other hand (and we've had a spate of really good print designers, who think very little about online considerations), and end-users/us on this other, magical third hand. So we're trying to fight the case of usability, accessibility, optimizing pages as best we can for Google, decent navigation etc., whilst there's a definite corporate brand being stamped on it by marketing/the designers.

Essentially, this means that there's scope for suggestions and improvements. Some of them would probably piss someone else off because of something the interview candidate doesn't know about (e.g. we have graphical menus we really, really want to get rid of, but marketing won't let us), but that's fine. It shows the candidate is thinking, and you can use that sort of conflict to drive the debate if you get a good flow here.

Mostly, my manager just wants someone here to say something that isn't completely bonkers. If they say "Oh, but that's all lovely" - either because they think it is, or because they think they should be a yes man and not criticize things, or because they just won't speak up for their own ideas - it's a mark against them. It's not a completely critical mark if they sail through everything else, but I gather that my manager likes people to do well here, even though it's essentially a five-ten minute browse of some print-outs (while a written test from the interview is marked, or whatever), and a ten minute chat.

[j4.livejournal.com]

Thanks! Sounds like a good way of seeing how people think about 'improving' a site. Though I'd want to make the point that I don't see any need to dive in and start "redesigning" just for the sake of it, to make my mark, shake things up, etc. ... okay, maybe that makes me too much of a yes-man, but really it's more if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it.

So we're trying to fight the case of usability, accessibility, optimizing pages as best we can for Google, decent navigation etc., whilst there's a definite corporate brand being stamped on it by marketing/the designers.

Sounds familiar... "And it needs to be more webby." :-/

[caramel-betty.livejournal.com]

Sounds familiar... "And it needs to be more webby." :-/

My favourite incident like that recently was with a US designer. (One bit of the company is largely based in the US for sales/marketing/events purposes, because 95% the customers are in North or South America.)

Really very nice design came through, which would have been fabulous if we'd been printing it out on shiny card and sending to people as an invite-cum-agenda. But it didn't work well for the intended purpose of email flyer. Between a couple of us, we managed to massage the text and pictures into a half-way decent HTML+CSS email, which looked okay in the end.

One of the many concerns my manager took back in a three-way conference call with marketing+designer was a mention about how much information was being put in graphics. (For example, each day had its date done in a pretty little logo showing a sort of hand-drawn-ish box for that date, and the dates either side, with the middle one highlighted in a different colour.)

My manager pointed out that company policy is to not embed images in outgoing mails, but to leave links in. We find that embedded content like that hits too many spam filters. However, we are aware that many people won't download the images because many recent clients don't do it by default (privacy concerns when spammers do it, etc.)

"Oh," says the designer, "mine does that."

I believe at this point, I borrowed *headthump* from you.