On how I interview Producers

In my years of producing video games, I've taken part in hundreds of interviews with prospective hires, the majority of them being producer candidates. In a previous article I discussed the key traits and behaviors I look for when hiring producers for video games.

In this article I will run through my format for interviewing producers.

This will be a (very) long article since there's a lot to cover. So strap in tight! If you're hiring for producers, this can be a guide for how to structure and run interviews yourself. If you don't follow it to the letter, at least it will give you some things to think about regarding what you would like to accomplish in the interview, and also some lines of questions you can incorporate into your own style. If you're a producer looking for a job, have fun taking a sneak peak behind the scenes, it might help you with your interview preparation!

Interview Goals

First off, my goal is not to test whether applicants can do the basic functions required of the role. I assume that if an applicant has made it this far and is doing a 60 minute on-site interview with a producer peer then screenings and initial calls have already confirmed they have a base level of competency.

I'm interviewing to see how people think.

I'm also looking for the key traits of empathy and agency, and the key behavior of asking questions. These are great to keep in mind as you interview. What this interview format tries to do is create situations where you can also observe the following abilities.

The ability or willingness to;

• operate within constraints
• describe factual details about project particulars
• describe high level concepts in "abstract"
• apply high level concepts to real-world scenarios
• keep calm under pressure, especially as a scenario gets worse and worse
• think on their feet, "creative thinking and problem solving"
• be honest when the candidate does not know something
• gracefully ask for help or know when to escalate issues within their organization
• reflect on a previous situation and offer meaningful insight on how to do things differently
• have a distinct interest in the art and craft of production (not just an interest in the video game industry)

Some other things that can help your interviews;

• 60 minutes is ideal for my format, 30 minutes is rushing things
• Run long if you have to, this is about finding out how people think and sometimes it takes time
• Interviewing as a pair is best, you and one other, and allows you to alternate leading the sections
• Take very detailed notes about what is said, it's important for reflection later

The Interview Format

Here it is in all its weirdness and glory!

The rest of the article will focus on effectively running each of these sections, and highlighting the goals are for each.

Small Talk

I try to always begin interviews with small talk and there are a few reasons for this. Depending on where you work, interviews for candidates can last an entire day on-site. As an interviewer, your session will be sandwiched somewhere in the middle of that 6 to 8 hr block. When you start with small talk you give the candidate a chance to breathe, relax and reset from the previous session before starting another one. It gives everyone a chance to be more present and focused on what comes next. Being able to help people feel comfortable and at ease during the beginning of the interview is a responsibility I feel the interviewer needs to take seriously. If your are genuinely interested and curious in the other person, it should be easy to carry on for 5 minutes talking about topics that are both professional and light heartened that can also set a relaxed tone.

If you are worried about what to say in this section, maybe you can lean on your interview partner to take the lead on this section. Alternatively you can always prepare some questions in advance that you know will most likely apply to candidates. For instance, at many places I've worked it has been quite common to interview candidates who have flown in from another city to do so. I usually ask if they have seen anything in town yet. Ask what they are excited to see, or if they are enjoying the city so far. That sort of thing. Keep it light and professional. I find that cracking jokes in this section is risky business since everyone's interpretation of humor is different. You're only trying to make space for everyone to settle into the interview and center their attention, while making everyone feel comfortable and safe and relaxed.

One option is also to include this time at the end of an interview, but I find that the overall tone setting is usually better when this is done up front. 

Introductions

The introductions exchange tries to achieve a number of things at once; you are setting the conversation tone for the 3 upcoming sections, and providing the candidate with clues on how to make their answers most relevant to you and your role in relationship to the open position.

Along with my interviewer partner, we begin with a summary of our roles, and then pass the stage back to the candidate. In my summary I try to mention my title and role, scope of responsibilities, years experience in the studio, and most importantly something about the relationship of my job to the role we are hiring for. I also try to say this as plainly and to the point as I possibly can.

This serves to set the tone for the candidate's response as well. If you've done lots of interviews, you know that this section can drag on and on while candidates meander from job to job, role to role, and add in little stories along the way, but keeping you from topics you need to get to in the hour. Keep it short with a tonal example and they will too.

Introductions aren't your opportunity to impress candidates with your wealth of experience either. This will show candidates that they can also be unfocused in their response and take things off course. Lead by example.

Tip! - As an interviewer pair, agree ahead of time which specific piece of the candidate's experience is the most relevant to dive into in greater detail. This will be what you focus on in the Just the Facts section. Alternatively, at the end of the introductions section, you can ask the candidate which role they feel is most similar or relevant to the role they are interviewing for. Focusing like this can remove distractions and also set the stage for everyone to be more present in the following questions.

Just the Facts

I sometimes call this section "pulling at threads" and it is heavily inspired by interviews I was lucky enough to participate in with Lambert Wolterbeek Muller, a former colleague and dear friend. I always found it striking how Lambert would ask a series of quick fire questions drilling into a specific piece of experience, with the aim of establishing the factual details around the landscape of a role.

If you've picked one of their past relevant experiences to dig into, start asking questions to find out more information about the specifics of that role. The purpose is to get as granular as possible, dig deep, and also gauge a candidates comfort level in diving into details. In a behavioral sense, this is the willingness to put all the cards on the table from a numbers standpoint and not add any coloration yet. This really highlights strengths and weaknesses in a producers ability to give a neutral summary of a situation that drives at clarity and understanding. This is a key behavior during development, and hopefully something they are comfortable to do here. This section tends to fly in the face of usual expectations in more common interviews however.

Practically, here are the types of questions I ask;

• how many people were on your team?
• how many people did you manage directly?
• how many producers were on the project as well?
• who did you report to? what was their role within the studio?
• how many people were in the studio as a whole?
• at what phase of the project did you start?
• which project phase transitions did you help manage?
• what artifacts did you create at these phase transitions?

And so on and so forth, etc. Keep going until you feel you've got a full and complete picture of the numbers that are important to the project structure and the development landscape of their experience. You might notice here that none of these questions have the usual follow up questions that ask candidates to then elaborate.

That's the whole point. The natural tendency will be to tack on an open ended question about one topic that invites opinion. Ex. "Which project phase transitions did you help manage? And how did it go?

The "and how did it go?" part, is a trap, for now. You will have to get used to asking good questions in this way for this section, but the results can be really revealing. In a sense, you are stepping on the garden hose of opinion and interpretation, while we build up context and specifics by the numbers, before releasing the elaboration during a later section. Remember when they told you "yes or no questions in interviews are a bad thing"? Well this is the exception to that rule.

There is a certain confidence needed, on the candidate's part, to be able to give straight forward answers in this section and not add any qualifiers or additional context. It can be quite jarring if this isn't something they are used to, but you can guide them through this and when they start to provide elaborate context, simply guide them back to the numbers and mention that for now we are only looking to get an idea of the situation first before diving into the impact and outcomes.

I should also mention that sometimes candidates can struggle in this section, but it isn't a deal breaker for me. It's a mode of communication that can be uncommon for some, depending on their experience or seniority, and also just serves to give more context to the interview as a whole. Once you've asked a few of these questions, you will start picking up on red and yellow flag issues that might have been present on their project given the nature of the structure, team size, setup, stakeholders, approval steps, etc. This gives you a lot of context and fuel for asking about challenges they might have faced, and how they overcame them.

Take your time, even if it goes long. This can sometimes eat up 10 minutes but it's always worth it.

Ideal Process

Changing gears again, this next section is where I ask candidates to recite their ideal process for some producer function; usually I ask about creating schedules. You can choose another function of the role if you'd like, but typically I like hearing producers describe how they go from a blank-page beginning to a workable schedule they can publish to the team. Give the candidate time and space to recite their ideal process; 'without any specific constraints, what's your ideal process for creating a schedule from scratch?".

You can ask some questions to understand what certain steps are for or what they mean by terms and so on, but try to hold back on analyzing or interrupting the flow here. Seek first to understand, even if it's very different than your own process. Write down everything. Your goal is to capture their process as thoroughly and completely as possible.

That's it, that's all. Next section!

Applied Example

Before we continue, I will also assume that you won't read out the sections titles to candidates as you go. It would spoil the reveal which comes later!

In this next section, you have to be a little bit creative. This is the only section that requires you to come up with an example on the spot. You can prepare something in advance if you wish, but if you've been asking good questions so far, and learning what their ideal process is, and you can relate all this back to the role in question and your experience on the job, then you are more than prepared for what's next.

Create a fictional example for the candidate based in the context of their role. I usually start with something like "Ok thank you. Let's change gears a little, we'd like to ask about something different. Let's assume you get this role here! You producing the team in question, and are now in a situation where..."

It's your job to fill in the fictional example with a scenario that will test their capability to manage a difficult situation as a producer on your team. I like to make it moderately challenging from the start. In the past I've used this sample situation; "You have just joined the team that is creating hero assets for the game, and there is an upcoming trailer that needs to be made in time for E3, which is only 3 months away. You know that the hero asset pipeline takes 6 months to complete from start to finish, and a number of these assets are already work-in-progress with teams and vendors. The art director and game director have just decided the trailer needs to include a hero asset that is planned for much later in development which will not be complete, or even started, in time for inclusion in this trailer. Where do you start? What do you do?"

This is purely an example, but it tries to illustrate how you can set the stage for an example of something that might be true for you and your teams. The candidate (hopefully) will ask a lot of questions of you and you can expand and elaborate on the details of the example as needed. In some ways this has always felt similar to being a dungeon master for role playing games, or maybe close to an improv session in others. Have fun with this! The idea is to keep the example related to scheduling and producer function as best you can, while keeping it relevant to the role. If you've structured this question well, you will give the candidate an opportunity to apply their ideal process to the working example. Although it might not be obvious to them in the moment, that this is the case. You can choose how obvious to make this, or not.

The candidate will then provide their answer once they have asked enough questions of you to make sense of the situation and its constraints. If all goes well, they have probably provided a sensible answer to the scenario. Now comes the fun part!

Complications

Now it's your turn to up the resistance and also increase the stakes. Whatever is provided as the initial solution to the situation should be met with something like; "Yes great. That thing you try works! However now... <add a complication>".

Your job now is to continually take their solutions into consideration and then add increasing complications that test their ability to adapt and deal with increasing problems. I like to throw in complications that also vary the 'type' of problems that needs to be addressed. Some complications can be related to the nature of pipelines and scheduling, some can be interpersonal, some can be communication, expectations, stakeholder management, approvals, missing on quality, and so on. Choose whichever complications you feel are best for the role or for what you'd like to find out about the candidate. You may also include challenges that are typical to your specific project or organization. Make this section your own and you will reap the fullest rewards.

Continue on like this for somewhere between 3 to 5 complications or until you feel that scenario is sufficiently complicated and strenuous, but everyone is still having fun and enjoying the example. Having a good feel for the room will let you know when it's time to stop.

If you're looking for practice on how to add meaningful complications, I have a different kind of link for you! There's a fabulous writing podcast I listen to called Writing Excuses. In this episode Mary Robinette Kowal discusses the process of using "yes-but, no-and" to add complications and conflict in writing scenarios while doing 'discovery writing', a form of improvisation. I feel this technique works great for keeping up momentum.

I have to say that the 'Complications' section is by far my favorite interview section and something I'm quite proud of. I feel it's the part of the format that is the most in my character, and is also fun and cheeky. This is also like me.

What was the purpose of all that?

Now that you've done the sections of 'Ideal Process' > 'Applied Example' > 'Complications', you will get to step back and see how the candidate did on the whole.

The 3 sections are positioned in this way to try and show the most contrast between the answers provided in Ideal Process and how different they might be compared to the solutions chosen for the Applied Example and in dealing with Complications.

I find that when asked about Ideal Process, most producers have enough training and knowledge to list out what we all expect to hear; Step by step processes that are common to our industry and others like it. This is all well and good, but it's one thing to read up on these resources and get familiar with processes, and another to reach for them when faced with real situations.

Where it really counts is how you can then apply that process during the Applied Example, which immediately follows the Ideal Process section. It's actually quite astonishing how often candidates' answers in Ideal Process look nothing like what they reach for in the Applied Example. Something seems to change for people when we start to move from the theoretical to the practical. I also think it's quite natural.

I've seen a broad spectrum here and it's interesting to note how far the distance is between ideal and applied for your candidate, to give you a sense of the type of producer you are interviewing. There are many types. I'm personally not very buttoned up on ideal process, but I am pretty creative and can adapt to ever changing problems and complications easily. Other producers are word for word perfect on ideal process quoting from project management books or other manuals, and then struggle after only a few complications. We are all different. Strengths and weaknesses vary greatlly.

When the difference between answers is quite extreme and I feel comfortable in the interview, I sometimes ask the candidate what they think about the difference themselves. Answers here can be really insightful.

Just remember to have fun and create a safe space for candidates to problem solve and hopefully you will also enjoy these sections as well!

Reflection

This is one of the remaining modes of thinking that I try to spend time on with candidates. It's also a great place for them to demonstrate agency, or rather the idea that "their actions and choices can directly affect the outcomes of a project".

I like to ask about when candidates felt they were not successful in the past and what they could have done differently to change things, if they had infinite time, resources, etc. Optionally if you feel that results in the Applied Example were mixed, you can also ask what they would have done differently not looking back on the whole example. This can be valuable but it is something I do far less than the former question where they get to choose the example from their past.

I am always looking for producers who reflect on how things went and strive to do better. They look at factors that went into both failure and success. Both are equally as important, although failure seems to get more attention. Being able to reproduce positive effects is just as important as avoiding negative ones.

Cleanup

This is an optional step I mention in case you feel you need to backtrack on topics, or ask additional questions to fill in gaps in your observations during the interview. Not much to say here. Use at your discretion but make sure not to eat up all the remaining time!

The most important section is next!

Questions?

I love hearing what questions candidates have to ask during interviews. As I said in my previous article; producers are masters of asking good questions. Some of my best memories of candidates have always been when they asked particularly pointed and interesting questions of us during the interview. Relevant questions can display a keen understanding of the landscape of development at your studio which great candidates can usually pick up on during the interview itself. This is an ability that can show great awareness and experience.

I make sure to leave a lot of space for candidates to ask questions, and I also make sure not to wait till the "end" of the interview to fit it in. When interviewers cut short the time for candidates to ask questions, it demonstrates a lack of respect for the time and effort candidates also take in coming to an interview and considering a job. Leaving space for this around the 40 or 45 minute mark is really nice, because even if it runs long and the remaining sections need to be shortened or cut, generally you have what you need to inform your decision. And hopefully the candidate does as well!

An interview goes both ways, and making sure that candidates can answer their own questions about the role, the studio, its culture, development, and so many other things, is important to help them making their decision to join the team.

Pitch

Sometimes you are able to showcase what a fantastic place your studio is to work at, during the answers for the candidate's Questions. However if you feel anything else needs to be said about this, you should make sure to spend some time on it before ending the interview.

I have always appreciated when interviewers have spent time on this when I have interviewed for roles, and it's something I consider in my decision making before agreeing to a job.

When I include Pitch in my format, I also sometimes outline challenges that I feel are common to the role in question. This can offer more food for thought, and also help the candidate during the interviews that follow after yours. I will also sometimes ask the following interviewers if something that I offered as a challenge was discussed (or not) during their sessions. It's nice to see when candidates do something with the information that is provided to them, and what better way to demonstrate that.

Curveball

I mentioned before that the Curveball section is optional, and it is for this reason; I usually include this to have a little fun with candidates if I feel that the rapport during the interview has gone particularly well! This usually means the interview was a success and this is a little fun to close off the session. If I feel that a candidate has not done a great job, I will usually skip this.

A Curveball can be any small question that 'breaks the fourth wall' in a way. It's one that is intentionally obscure or hard that you expect candidates to get wrong.

Lately I've been using one that I had thrown at me some years ago, which I failed miserably.

It goes like this;"So you have 'Agile' listed on your cv here. Can you name any 2 of the core values or principles from the Agile Manifesto?"

If you just read that and all of a sudden can't remember them either, don't worry, you're not alone. I find that very few people can actually remember these when asked. But that isn't really the point of the question.

Usually after some stunned expressions, and shared laughs, we discuss with candidates what we all feel matters about agile methodologies when applied to the kind of hybrid models employed in the video games industry, and what we feel we have internalized about the ideals.

What's most important about this section is more that candidates can roll with the punches, and feel comfortable enough to laugh things off when they don't know, and also freely admit if they don't know something. I actually like when people get this wrong, but maybe that's just to make myself feel better about always forgetting them myself!

The Big Summary

Alright. And if you've made it this far in reading the article; thank you! You're awesome!

It was no simple feat to write, and I know it's been a difficult read with much to consider. I hope that as you think on it, that you keep in mind the goals from the beginning. The structure and the format, the sequencing of questions, the tone and focus choices, all of it is designed to try to move producer candidates in and out of different modes of language and thought. To try to find out where they are comfortable. To try to see how they think.

Context switching is something producers face many times, every day. We are constantly being asked to switch contexts and modes to adapt to different situations, and provide services as varied as chairing a meeting, running a standup, grooming an excel document, and helping mediate interpersonal issues, and often more, all within a single work day. Those who are meant to be producers take this kind of context switching in stride, because they simply live it, or they've gotten used to it. To me, that's the real experience showing.

Thank you all so very much for reading this! If you would like to reach me to ask questions about this article or anything else, please feel free to do so!

~Cheers, Dave