Interesting interview anecdote
I've been the sole technical person in the process for hiring a new "senior endpoint engineer" (desktop-oriented systems engineer) at my company. We went through interviews the other day, and the results were interesting and may add some perspective. Skip to fourth paragraph if TL;DR.
We had two candidates. There were other candidates, but these were the strongest. One had a cleaner resume, a computer science degree, good experience, roughly a decade progressive all within one company with promotions, no certifications. The other had a verbose resume with less formatting, no college, no certs, but great experience. (Bear in mind if I'd seen MCSE Private Cloud or Desktop Infrastructure such a candidate would have been a veritable shoe-in.) I was a little more excited about the former (as was my non-technical boss) but figured the latter would be stronger technically. We did phone screens, and that led to the same perception. The latter candidate was more technical, but seemed weaker with scripting (this involves a lot of automation and packaging, so it's a big deal).
So far, the weaker but better-acumen candidate is definitely winning, even with my unapologetically-technical self. We did face-to-face, and that's where things got interesting. The preferred candidate really flopped on the technical questions. They were mostly high-level, show-me-how-you-think-and-what-you-know, not low-level-memorize-unimportant-stuff gotchas, which I don't really believe in for systems engineers. But he flopped, big time. Candidate #2 had the exact answers I wanted to hear on everything but scripting, as expected. I liked both personalities. Candidate #2 seemed like he'd be a bit more combative on technical decisions, but I'm honestly okay with that. The first guy was more of a follower.
I said I'd hire #1 as a mid-level and mentor him, but not as a peer, and that #2 was preferred for the skill level we need. My boss agreed. However, HR gave a hard no. They asked important questions we didn't (mind you, because it would be redundant, not because we lacked the sense to want to gauge personality and soft skills), and because of his answers, someone who was otherwise a shoe-in got disqualified. He had no certs or college because, almost in his exact words, he thought they were beneath him. He clearly thought he was smarter than everyone else and would be highly combative. He also spent a significant time trashing his former employer and a former manager. Really, really bad moves.
People, don't do this, even if it's how you feel. Politely and diplomatically describe conflicts with former managers. Give humble, relatable reasons for why you feel you forwent whatever degree or certification the employer is looking for. Talk about mentoring, collaborating on solutions, and coming to the best outcome, not about getting your way because you're generally right (even if it's true). For the most part, if you have an interview beyond a junior/entry level, the position is yours to lose by making these kinds of mistakes.
