Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board

Lominger skills interview?

So I have a job interview lined up for Friday to try and get into a different development group at the company where I already work.  The invitation to the interview refers to it as the "Lominger skills interview". 

I've never heard this term.  A quick Google seems to indicate it is some kind of interviewing methodology.  I'd like to do well, and was wondering if anyone on these boards has experience with the types of questions I should expect/prepare for.

Rob H
Tuesday, February 17, 2004


I did some googling myself and see how you could be stuck.  I haven't done an interview before, but based on their website expect a long, formal interview. 

"The 12 sections in the Professional Handbook provide information that will help you determine if applicants possess specific pre-determined Competencies. Each of the 68 chapters (one for each competency with a special added chapter on learning agility) features a list of arenas/domains to explore, dozens of sample questions separated into four interviewing dimensions, themes to look for, the most likely resume of an applicant with these Competencies, and much more."

They also have a suite of software, so you might want to prepare for answering your questions on-line or doing some kind of on-line test.

To the mod...could you please remove my LMAO post.  With tapiwa's comments gone it just makes me look like a lunatic:)

Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Good lord - 11 replies an only one remains?

I can give you the same advice the soviets gave Aldrich Ames to prepare for his CIA polygraph:
1) Relax
2) Build a rapport with the interviewer.

Best of luck!


Tuesday, February 17, 2004

A search for Lominger Interview turns up a lot more than with the word Skills in between.

On the Lominger website it looks like you can take a test online for $25. Click Online Products from any page. You can also download brochures by clicking Downloads.

The Interview software is $3,000 a year, but the Career software is $25 a pop, and who knows, might give you some good feedback anyway irregardless of where you end up working or what test you take at what HR office.

Found this link: one of the gray boxes is from someone at Lominger.

And this quote on newsgroups:

"There is a system called Career Architect which is the best profiling resource I've ever seen.  The system deals with desirable competencies of employees as well as organizations and departments, and even comes with a book of interview questions to identify each competency."

Regarding the polygraph test, a book I was just reading (Telling Lies by Paul Eckman - interesting, but dry, and much of this information I believe was superseded by some of his later books) had some information about polygraphs. Basically, as you might suspect, it measures emotions and not lies, and a primary tactic in giving a polygraph test is to convince the person taking it that it's foolproof. What gives you away is what Paul Eckman calls (I believe) Detection Fear. One method used to convince someone the test is foolproof is to have them pick a card from a deck, and using the polygraph, tell the person which card was his based on his answer to a series of questions. (Was this your card? - always answer No.) Some administrators use marked decks.
Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Detection Apprehension.
Tuesday, February 17, 2004

From my experiences with polygraphs, polygraph examiners, police officers, and my reading about polygraphs, I believe the explanation that a polygraph in and of itself is essentially worthless - there is no such thing as a "lie detector."

What *does* exist is a skilled interrogator with a tool that society has been told to believe can tell if they're lying.

Most lie detector work is about getting the guy in the chair to confess to the crime. Period.

This also points out why it is absolutely worthless as an employment screening tool.


Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Yes I love hearing my own voice. Regarding that gray box quote:


Take problem solving,
for instance. A skilled individual uses “rigorous
logic and methods to solve difficult problems with
effective solutions; probes all fruitful sources for
answers; can see hidden problems; is excellent
at honest analysis; looks beyond the obvious and
doesn’t stop at the first answer.” The unskilled is
“not a disciplined problem solver; may be stuck
in the past, wed to precedent; has to rework the
problem a second time; may be a fire-ready-aim
type and may get impatient and jump to
conclusions too soon.” When this skill is overused
the individual “may tend toward analysis paralysis;
may wait too long to come to conclusion; may not
set analysis priorities; may get hung up on the
process and miss the big picture”. An unskilled
problem solver will over-docket client files; will be
unable to clearly instruct associates and may go
off on blind-alley research.


IMHO this is the opposite of correct. While it contains some kernels of truth, it's too tied to the textbook decision making models.

When dealing with a completely foreign and unfamiliar situation, you are more likely to come up with variables and weigh them. This is what leads to "analysis paralysis." You cannot see the consequences of your actions, so you must weigh each possibility carefully.

On the other hand, if you have more domain experience and confidence, you are more likely to come up with a viable solution off the cuff and pursue it. I.e. you can see farther down the road because you've travelled it before.

I don't know if that will help you get over your fear of the Lorimer test or not, but just follow Philo's advice. Relax and make friends with the computer administering the test.
Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Seriously. What sort of company thinks this is the way to assess developers?

Tuesday, February 17, 2004

Tuesday, February 17, 2004

I'm starting to hate word 'competencies'.  What's wrong with 'skills'?

Wednesday, February 18, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home