Tomorrow at noon I’ll have my interview with Google. I went through a great deal of effort to be as prepared for this interview as I could be. I poured over my resume, I researched practice questions, I had friends and family run me through mock interviews. Let me share some of the things I learned, and tell you about some of the things I did.
 
I proofread my resume about a million times. When I printed it, I found that I spelled “laptop” as “laptpo”. Ouch! Whatever, I made it this far into the process with a typo, on my resume. On this plus side I did rig up this resume custom just for Google. Just goes to show that you cannot proofread or double check your work too many times.
 
I have a long document with all my skills in it, formatted the way I wanted my resume to look. When I want to apply somewhere I copy this document and delete out skills until it fits on one page. This only leaves the skills that the prospective employer cares about most. This is great because I can proofread the big document and benefit from it on all the resume I create later. Each employer I deem worth an hour of my time can get a custom version of my resume. It usually takes me about 15 minutes to snip the chaff, then about 45 minutes to put in company names and copiously proofread. I also made a generic PC Technician and Software Engineer Resume, for businesses that aren’t worth an hour of my time.
 
When printing my resume I always use some special kind of paper. I have been told that this make it stick out in the pile from other resumes. For this I purchased some 100% cotton 32# paper, it is thick, has a rich color and feels sturdy. Then I just printed it on photo paper. The photo paper is thicker, harder to rip, and this ink/paper combination is completely waterproof. I do not know if this works, but it can’t really hurt. I will post my interviewers reaction to a glossy waterproof resume later.
 
Next, I wanted to brush up on Linux and PC hardware skills. Not that I have let them lapse in any particular way, but I do not know everything. I started looking into Comptia’s practice tests and their Certification Objectives. I have taken countless A+ tests and passed them all, but judging by my knowledge of the objectives I am a little surprised I scored as well as I did. I studied the best I could in the few short days I had. Despite the objectives list, I feel that my real world experience will pull me through. For some scope on my experience, right now, in my house I have four computers I am fixing for other people. I will diagnose them all successfully, and suggest solutions to all the people who own them. I guess actually fixing computers is the best kind of study I can do.
 
I also searched for A+ practice tests, even though there are plenty out there I feel I came up empty handed. Most of what is out there is old and not worth studying. I stuck with Comptia as my guide, they had enough to fill my time well.
 
I asked three other people to ask me technical interview type questions. There where tons of technical questions, and there were Crazy Google interview questions. Many people have told me that an interviewer may throw crazy stuff at you just to see how you react. If this is true I think the worst things you can do is give up or say things like “I don’t know”.
 
I think the best way to respond to crazy questions is to give the kind of answer they are looking for and a creative answer. If a question relates to real world behavior then it may be wise to point out what could be done better to improve teamwork or leadership or one of those other key skills that all businesses are looking for. For example, on the bridge crossing question couple question from the crazy interview question page: I would start by explaining how I would carry the 10 minute guy because I would be the 2 minute guy or if he refused I would toss him the flashlight once I crossed. Then I would explain the ‘Proper solution’ which involves the fast people ferrying the flashlight back and forth so both the slowpokes can cross together to save time. Then finally. I would state that if the bridge is so unsafe that if a flashlight is mandatory to cross it and our flashlight has exactly the amount of time that we we need it, then it would be safer to wait until morning. My rationale is, if it is too dangerous to cross without the flashlight then it is too dangerous to mount a rescue mission when something goes wrong.
 
I will follow this up tomorrow with as much as I can say. I am sure that there will be mistakes, highlights and an amazing story about how I got my new job with Google.

Original  story