I don't think I can even count the number of times I've met both male and female geeks that have a difficult time interacting with others that they find even remotely attractive. Not everyone has exemplary social skills, and this "John" sounds like he may have been incredibly nervous, or possibly even intimidated. Interviews can do that to people. This is where skill and experience comes into play on the interviewer's side of things...

I have been on an interview panel, chaired by a woman, where the interviewee failed to look at her even once. We rejected him outright.

I'm not sure why there's any question -- "team fit" ranks over "technical competence" in our interview score sheets -- what good is a technically competent team member that can't interact with female clients or coworkers? We've rejected plenty of candidates that did well in technical interviews, but failed the "team fit" group lunch (that includes non-technical team members).

Is there some explanation that would make that behavior okay? Even if it's religious or cultural or even extreme shyness, would that somehow make the behavior more acceptable or easier to deal with? I'm not sure why you're conflicted over this.

I have edited your description to remove some of the details not relevant to the question. Let me know if you do not agree with the new version, I will add back the details that you see as relevant.

Even if this is behaviour acceptable in John's culture, it's not acceptable in your yours. There may be some situations where it's acceptable to compromise (for example, in the company I work for we often make sure that documents sent to certain countries are officially signed off by a male, even if the work was supervised by a female engineer, simply because it saves a huge amount of pointless hassle, and the female engineers accept that for pragmatic reasons) but "job applicant is able to talk to the company receptionist" is a non-negotiable job requirement in any Western company!

Quite recently I was in a meeting with a vendor's (all male) development team with a male colleague. A couple of their developers treated me like I was invisible, even though I was the most senior technical person in the room. I would answer a question and they responded to my male colleague as if he had answered, not me. It amazes me that even now I still get this sometimes.

Ask him why he behaves that way. Knowing his reasons might help you better judge the impact of his behaviour, and whether or not it can be improved. If nothing else, it'll get a dialogue started, which is better than guessing and worrying over it.

There may have been a valid cultural reason for the behavior, however, clearly they did not fit well within your environment/culture and no explanation offered. With that, only one thing comes to mind; Survival of the fittest. Cultures are important. You stated that this behavior could have perception problems with your customers regardless of the any reason behind it. That, in of itself, is enough. Culture is important and so is survival. Weird is weird. We do not have to understand it, excuse it, compensate for it, or tolerate it. We only have to move on and do what is the best we can.

This is a disappointing question. From the title, I was expecting strange quirky behaviour that had nothing to do with the job in question, which would have been interesting, and more of a challenge to answer. But this is clearly relevant to the job.

'How to handle it' could be as simple as asking why an owner was e-mailed rather than communicating with the receptionist. Asking about common office behavior is very reasonable. And some discussion of potential 'disability' is necessary simply to determine if reasonable accommodations can be made.

This is too small to be an answer, so I put it as comment. If "John" is competent from a technical-point-of-view, then, as an interviewer, I would confront him about his behaviour and evaluate the situation based on what he answers. But I agree: it's definitely a red flag.

@JaneS I wodner what would have happened had you left the room and let them get on with it. Perhaps consider not going to that company next time and see what happens?

@Mawg I'm the technical lead for my company and responsible for project design and implementation. I have to be there. They'll just have to get used to there being a senior, technically proficient woman present :)

Did he seem generally shy, or was he bombastically full of himself? Could be anything from difficulties with social interaction so severe they are a genuine disorder to simply being a misogynist. In the first case, the extreme shyness will be gradually overcome once John has spent time with those he initially struggles with and could well be the flip-side that comes with being a "technical savant".

OP, one thing that might help - did he blush a lot when addressed by women? That could inidcate shyness. Or did he stick his nose in the air? Can you describe his body language?

Make it a point in your interview to have each team member ask at least one question (women, too). Then see how he responds.

An interview is merely for you to work out three things - 1. can they do the job? 2. will they do the job? 3. will they fit in? Answer no to any of those and you should not be offering the job to that candidate.

@Mawg, what an offensive thing to say. Why should Jane accommodate them and harm her own career? She is the senior person. Jane S I feel for you because I too had this happen in the 1980s. It was extremely awkward and humliating.It seems we are regressing.

I had not realized that it could be interpreted that way! I thought that if Jane stood aside, everything would fall apart, thuse exposing the bigots for the fools that they are. @JaneS did I offend?

@Mawg, I am glad you didn't mean to be insulting. However, in 40 years in the workplace, every time a man has a problem working with a woman because she is a woman, then it is her career that takes the hit as she is the one removed from the good project or given the worse tasks to do or not allowed on the business trip or otherwise separated from the man who cannot be expected to be discommoded. Then her performance is evaluated as being worse than his. This is not just epidemic to the IT world but all professions in my observation. I have seen this play out hundreds of times for many women.

"Weird is weird. We do not have to understand it, excuse it, compensate for it, or tolerate it." I find this worldview very depressing.

Do a background check on this guy. For safety.

@HLGEM Thanks, I don't have this happen often any more (it's normally the smaller organisations that still seem to have this attitude towards women), so it's striking when it does.

@Mawg One thing I have needed, being a female technical person is a thick hide :) I appreciate your concern, and think nothing more of it.

@JaneS what you describe sounds so similar to something that happens to me all the time as a non-Asian foreigner in Japan.

@AmaniKilumanga There are plenty of types of "different" that seem to elicit odd behaviours in some people. It's when it impacts on us negatively that we have a real problem.

Did that candidate just assume everyones gender??? :^)

@NumLock What do you mean ? He was there and saw the people, that's how he was able to tell males from females.

@SantiBailors You'd be surprised by the amount of people that are for example looking like females (and potentially are females in a biological way, too) but don't identify as such.

@NumLock I guess, but you were wondering whether the candidate assumed everyone's gender, not whether he assumed what everyone currently identify as.

"Being weird is not a protected class" and when are we going to add it?

When I write a technical document I always sign with just initial and last name (because my first name identifies me as female and foreign at the same time) just to avoid irrelevant distractions. Especially if that document is going to customers in certain countries.