IEEE Solid-State Circuits Magazine - Spring 2016 - 6

a ssoc iate editor's vie w

Marcel Pelgrom

The Candidate

He is taller than I expected. These
days, all candidates for research
positions are taller and look younger
to me. My colleagues tell me that
this observation comes with age.
I take a look at him while we greet
each other; he is obviously not used
to wearing a suit, but I appreciate
that he dresses for the occasion.
(Note: Please read the words "he" and
"him" as the impartial reference to a
person of any gender, age, race, or
extraterrestrial origin.)
Our recruitment procedure has
survived all innovations in the HR
field and is still conducted in the
same manner as my predecessors
and I experienced it many years ago.
The first selection is based on the
available data: letter, CV, but also
personal impressions and recommendations by university staff. A
positive outcome results in a one-day
visit, when five senior staff members and a Human Resources manager interview the candidate. After
each interview, everybody sends in a
little report with a judgment on only
two aspects: personality and technical/scientific level. It is amazing to
see how well the observations of the
interviewers match, despite everybody's different interviewing style.
In Europe, the first stop of an interview is at the coffee machine. We chat
a bit on the candidate's university, a
subject with which he should feel at
ease. Once back in a room, the discussion rapidly focuses his technical
work. From his letter and CV, I have
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MSSC.2016.2546583
Date of publication: 21 June 2016

S P R I N G 2 0 16

N
(a)

(b)

C, 0

C, V
(c)

Figure 1: The puzzles for the candidates: (a) the metal cube, (b) the metal frame in a magnetic
field, and (c) the disappearing capacitor energy.

picked a few discussion topics. Most
candidates are prepared and carry
a copy of their thesis or a publication. Normally this is the part in the
interview where the candidate goes
full steam. Some call that "nerdish,"
but I enjoy listening to someone with
true passion for his work. I am gently
checking what his own contribution
was and how thoroughly he conducted his research. Did he grasp the
core of what his research comprises?
And can he convey the essence?
Now the time has come for a first
test. I keep going back to one of the
main points in his work. "Why this?"
I ask. And again, "Why not something
else?" This will push him to the limits, and it becomes clear whether
he fundamentally understood his
subject or just paraphrases what he
read. Inevitably the point is reached
where nobody would be able to counter the insisting questions. What will
the candidate do when he is unable
to answer? Will he start with a bit of
smooth waffling, or can he describe
his own limitations and point to a
way out? This is a vital quality for
anyone operating in a larger team.

IEEE SOLID-STATE CIRCUITS MAGAZINE

Perhaps a second interaction test
is needed. Mindlessly, I will make a
rather severe mistake. This should
provoke another opportunity to test
the interaction qualities.
For the next hurdle I have chosen a special treat from my collection of nasty problems: the metal
cube (Figure 1). Think of a polystyrene plate. A metal cube is placed
with one corner on the plate, with
the cube's space diagonal perpendicular to the plate. The metal cube
is pushed through the plate. How
many corners does the resulting
hole show? Now some mild panic is
visible in his eyes. What a question
for an EE engineer! I am chatting on,
while he is mulling over the puzzle.
Will he return to the issue with an
answer or, even better, a rationale?
Better a good explanation than the
right answer out of the blue.
The previous candidate had to
solve the magnetism question. Imagine
a horizontal magnetic field between
two opposing poles. A square metal
frame in vertical position falls through
(continued on p. 9)

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Solid-State Circuits Magazine - Spring 2016