9 ms·

This is taking interviewing and hiring in the wrong direction. At my company, we have a relatively short interview process, followed by a 3 month full salary pr

by jbob2000 11y ago

This is taking interviewing and hiring in the wrong direction. At my company, we have a relatively short interview process, followed by a 3 month full salary probation period. The interview is used to weed out "red flaggers" and identify high-level strengths and weaknesses. It is completely non-technical. We assume that the person applying for the job has the technical requirements. (We also make judicious use of references, something people seem to have forgotten about. Quick phone call to previous employers can save you tons of money!) The 3 month probation period is the real "test" and the applicant will be put on a small project with another employee mentoring. If someone lacks technical ability, it will be evident in the first few days and we can move on to the next applicant. If the person doesn't like the work environment, they can walk away no questions asked (maybe the commute is too long or they don't like the office space, etc. etc.). This is cheaper than having directors and executives try to plan around all sorts of interview stages. It is much less stressful, as the applicant, once into the probation period, is treated like a regular employee and has much more opportunity to "prove their worth". Stop adding more shit to the interview! Don't make it longer, do the opposite!

lmorris84 11y ago
I like the sound of this. As well as giving the candidate ample opportunity to show what they can do, it'll also be representative of the actual work they'll be doing in that role so everyone will be going into the post-probation period with eyes wide open.
lazyant 11y ago
3 month probation will work great with unemployed or fresh out of college people etc, not with employed people, certainly not with senior candidates.
- jbob2000 11y ago
  Why not? Because they have to leave their jobs? Are they committed to my company and the job or not? Sounds like it's a good litmus test.
  - zerr 11y ago
    Are you committed to the employees or not? Yes, it's a good litmus test...
  - crpatino 11y ago
    > Are they committed to my company and the job or not? What have you done for them besides offering a rosy mission/vision statement that may or may not end up being a bad joke like a lot of rosy mission/vision statements out there? Just because you have chosen to call yourself an founder does not compel the Magic Fairy of Labor to provide an endless pool of fans that will throw themselves between yourself and a bullet every time the "needs" of the company demand it. > Sounds like it's a good litmus test. Yes, indeed!
  - cwyers 11y ago
    > Are they committed to my company and the job or not? That's a giant red flag. Saying that sort of thing... no, I'm not committed to you if that's your attitude. Holy hell in a handcart.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > Are they committed to my company and the job or not? Unless they are heavily (to the point it provides the overwhelming majority of their material support) invested -- in equity terms -- in your company, why should they be committed to it? Certainly, someone holding -- much less seeking -- at-will employment has little rational reason to be particularly committed to the company, as the company has made relatively little commitment to them (essentially, none beyond paying them for work already done, and not dismissing them for any legally-prohibited reason.)
- baseonmars 11y ago
  3 months is the standard in the UK. It's not often used, but it certainly can be.
- troebr 11y ago
  In France there's a 4 month probation period extensible to up to 7 months. It's too long, 7 months makes very little sense, and some companies abuse it. Basically you can pretty much fire at will during this probation period, but after it's _really_ hard to fire under French employment laws. If you're in a field where it's hard to land a job, it's 7 months of butt clenching. I've worked in a company where I've been let go after 2 months in the probation period, but it was clear I wasn't a good fit with the company culture. This is what the probation period is for, we didn't need 7 months to figure that out. On the other hand, I worked for a consulting company that automatically extended all the probation periods, and laid off people that were on probation if they didn't have enough consulting contracts to feed everybody on the payroll (and then reshuffle contracts among people post-probation that were unfireable).
  - k__ 11y ago
    In Germany we got 6 months. You can get fired faster in this time (2 weeks) but you can also leave faster. I saw employees and employers use this a few times.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      The probationary periods in France and Germany address a different public policy issue than the trial period we're discussing here. After the probationary period in France expires, it is legally much more difficult to terminate an employee. That need does't exist in the US, where employees can be terminated without cause.
- bryanlarsen 11y ago
  There are companies without probation periods? I've never seen any. In most companies probation periods are a formality, they're only used for gross incompatibilities. But there are some that use them frequently.
  - angelbob 11y ago
    The US has at-will employment in most states, but no explicit probationary period.
- RightWingRabble 11y ago
  Nobody mentioned senior candidates. Not the linked site or the parent you're replying to. Yes, you may want to have a different hiring practice for the few senior members of your team. You may also want to have a different hiring practice for the CTO. Nobody is suggesting these positions are equivalent and should have equivalent hiring practices.
cballard 11y ago
If you are in the US, what is the difference between the "3 month probation period" and the rest of their employment, since you can fire them at any time anyways?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- jbob2000 11y ago
  I'm in Canada and the list of reasons we can fire someone for is very short.
  - RightWingRabble 11y ago
    Is performance one of those reasons? Because if it is, the rest of the list doesn't matter.
    - bryanlarsen 11y ago
      Yes, but you must: •set a clear and reasonable standard of performance •communicate the expected level of performance •measure the employee’s performance •take appropriate action to address any concerns •allow a reasonable time for improvement. from: http://www.hrreporter.com/blog/canadian-hr-law/archive/2013/01/09/can-you-dismiss-an-employee-for-cause-due-to-poor-performance#sthash.ovneJL27.dpuf http://www.hrreporter.com/blog/canadian-hr-law/archive/2013/... Which is why pretty much every single employment contract in Canada includes a probationary period.
      - mahyarm 11y ago
        Do Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) style firings get around this?
        bm1362 11y ago
        I believe PIPs exist to both measure the employee's performance and provide documentation to fire the employee. PIPs exist solely for legal reasons -- it protects the employer from being liable for an unjust firing. I'd be interested to see stats around how many times a PIP turned around and improved the employee.
asadlionpk 11y ago
The 3 month probation method may work with large and stable companies but for a startup, keeping a bad programmer for 3 months will be highly toxic and can actually kill the company.
- vonmoltke 11y ago
  I think that danger is highly overblown.
  - rpedela 11y ago
    A bad hire will drain financial resources yet contribute little to success of the product/company. If a company has a good financial cushion, then you are right that a hiring mistake will not be catastrophic. However if a company is struggling financially then it can be.
- jbob2000 11y ago
  Well that's the great thing about it being probationary! You don't have to keep them for the whole period, if you realize they aren't a fit in the first week, you can move on.
Jemaclus 11y ago
The big problem with this is that I wouldn't leave my current job for a 3 month contract that may or may not pan out. If I'm currently unemployed, then I might take this risk, but there are other companies who will do the work up front to decide whether I'm a good fit (and them for me), and once I accept the offer, I'm employed for the foreseeable future. The 3 month probation period (or even a 2 week contract, as others suggest) just won't work with senior candidates like me who already have jobs and might just be looking for better opportunities.
- eljimmy 11y ago
  I would think that if you are confident that you're qualified for the job then you shouldn't need to worry about any probation period. Job security between the two is an illusion. It doesn't matter if you're contract or full-time. You can lose one just as easily as you can lose the other.
  - Jemaclus 11y ago
    I'm not sure that's true. (I don't disagree, I'm just not sure.) I think an employer might be more willing to take a risk on a candidate they're not sure of if it's only for a few weeks. "Well, we're 50/50 on this guy, so let's bring him in for 2 weeks and see how it goes." On the other hand, if it's a permanent hire right off the bat, they'll want to be a fair bit better than just 50/50.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 11y ago
      Answers to this would be all over the map, but I'm going with "no." If I/we make a job offer to someone, it's because we think you're a good fit and you will be productive. Bringing someone in for 2 weeks, then someone else in for a month, then another guy for 2 months wastes even more time than just interviewing them each for half a day. Not to mention the uncertainty and morale effects on the rest of the team.
      - Jemaclus 11y ago
droithomme 11y ago
You make good points. For top talent, it's much less stressful and uncertain and more likely to result in gain to just continue working on and publishing one's own products than to deal with the mess of precious entitled thinking that dominates the interviewing and hiring process of the contemporary corporate scene.
tptacek 11y ago
Why would I ever accept a job at a company who treated the first 3 months of my employment as an extended interview, after which I could be released without penalty? When a software accepts a full-time position, they are taking a mammoth pay cut from what they could make 1099 contracting. They do that because the full-time position comes with a commitment to continued employment, so even though they could be making 2x-3x more per day consulting, they don't have to hustle to keep their utilization up. The "3 month probation" thing is essentially a temp-to-perm contacting position. Do you pay people 2x-3x more during that period?
- Jemaclus 11y ago
  Agree completely. And I wouldn't leave my currently solid job, as much as I might dislike it, for a 3 month contract-to-hire position. That's insanity.
- dang 11y ago
  > The "3 month probation" thing is essentially a temp-to-perm contacting position. Do you pay people 2x-3x more during that period? What about paying people the 2x-3x more in the event you decide not to keep the hire? Then the mechanism becomes a 3-month option to make the job either full time or a fairly compensated contract.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    That would be much more fair.
  - atomicUpdate 11y ago
    > What about paying people the 2x-3x more in the event you decide not to keep the hire? This could be pretty easily abused, since it doesn't sound hard to get through the door if they are assuming you're qualified technically. So all you have to do is know just enough to fake it a little bit, then coast for as long as you can to get a big payout at the end.
    - tptacek 11y ago
seanwilson 11y ago
What's wrong with adding a short online programming test at the start of the interview process to weed out clearly unsuitable candidates? Interviews take up a lot of time.
snegu 11y ago
Do employees get full benefits during that probation period? I know I wouldn't be willing to leave a secure job to be uninsured for 3 months.
dominotw 11y ago
ppl sign up for this ? So I have to relocate or stay away from my family for 3 months for some coding job. wtf. And everyday is an "interview" for 3 months where my every move will watched and analyzed? What a strange and disrespectful way to treat people.
jazzyk 11y ago
>Quick phone call to previous employers can save you tons of money Not sure about that - I thought that most companies these days will confirm the dates of past employment and nothing else (for fear of lawsuits). Also, anyone who submits references will make sure that they (the references) speak highly of the job-seeker, even if s/he is a total flake.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  Also someone who's leaving because he couldn't be productive in the environment isn't likely to receive much praise from their ex-employer.
mirimir 11y ago
Consulting works a lot like this. Talking with new clients, they ask if I can do something. I say sure, and by when. If it works, we agree on billing rate. Initial projects are almost always small. Unless they're desperate. If they like what I've done, and are OK about the cost, they come back.
deegles 11y ago
I imagine you don't have a lot of H1B hires. I'm on one and I wouldn't even consider interviewing at a company that did a trial period. It's just too much risk.
orless 11y ago
> Quick phone call to previous employers can save you tons of money! That may be really dangerous for the ex-employer. I'd never comment on an ex-employee beyond confirming that he worked on the given dates. > This is cheaper than having directors and executives try to plan around all sorts of interview stages. From my experience, in the first 3-6 month you invest a whole lot in the new employee. He or she is very far from 100% productive and you also need to assign someone for mentoring which also takes company resources. Bad hires are really expensive. In my previous company I was involved a lot in hiring. After CV screening we normally did a 1-2 hour interview (both technical and non-technical) which was (in a positive case) follow by an offer to spend one day working with us. Finally, a permanent contract with 6 month probation time (standard practice in Germany). We had very high success rate. No bad hires on my memory, low fluctuation, very high employee loyality. The company has stellar employee feedback on kununu.com. The downside was that many applicants were really discouraged by our hiring process. Some people were outraged by the fact that they had to actually write code on the interview. Some thought we the purpose of the probation day was to make the work for free. But that's OK, we've found a lot of great people anyway. Now I'm working for a huge corporation. I'm normally not involved in interviews for permanent positions but I'm always interviewing when staffing external developers my projects. (We staff developers mainly externally.) It's normally 1-hour interview, again both technical as well as non-technical. In any case I can't imagine hiring on the basis of a non-technical interview. Bad hires are just way too expensive.

lmorris84 11y ago

I like the sound of this. As well as giving the candidate ample opportunity to show what they can do, it'll also be representative of the actual work they'll be doing in that role so everyone will be going into the post-probation period with eyes wide open.

lazyant 11y ago

3 month probation will work great with unemployed or fresh out of college people etc, not with employed people, certainly not with senior candidates.

jbob2000 11y ago
Why not? Because they have to leave their jobs? Are they committed to my company and the job or not? Sounds like it's a good litmus test.
- zerr 11y ago
  Are you committed to the employees or not? Yes, it's a good litmus test...
- crpatino 11y ago
  > Are they committed to my company and the job or not? What have you done for them besides offering a rosy mission/vision statement that may or may not end up being a bad joke like a lot of rosy mission/vision statements out there? Just because you have chosen to call yourself an founder does not compel the Magic Fairy of Labor to provide an endless pool of fans that will throw themselves between yourself and a bullet every time the "needs" of the company demand it. > Sounds like it's a good litmus test. Yes, indeed!
- cwyers 11y ago
  > Are they committed to my company and the job or not? That's a giant red flag. Saying that sort of thing... no, I'm not committed to you if that's your attitude. Holy hell in a handcart.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Are they committed to my company and the job or not? Unless they are heavily (to the point it provides the overwhelming majority of their material support) invested -- in equity terms -- in your company, why should they be committed to it? Certainly, someone holding -- much less seeking -- at-will employment has little rational reason to be particularly committed to the company, as the company has made relatively little commitment to them (essentially, none beyond paying them for work already done, and not dismissing them for any legally-prohibited reason.)
baseonmars 11y ago
3 months is the standard in the UK. It's not often used, but it certainly can be.
troebr 11y ago
In France there's a 4 month probation period extensible to up to 7 months. It's too long, 7 months makes very little sense, and some companies abuse it. Basically you can pretty much fire at will during this probation period, but after it's _really_ hard to fire under French employment laws. If you're in a field where it's hard to land a job, it's 7 months of butt clenching. I've worked in a company where I've been let go after 2 months in the probation period, but it was clear I wasn't a good fit with the company culture. This is what the probation period is for, we didn't need 7 months to figure that out. On the other hand, I worked for a consulting company that automatically extended all the probation periods, and laid off people that were on probation if they didn't have enough consulting contracts to feed everybody on the payroll (and then reshuffle contracts among people post-probation that were unfireable).
- k__ 11y ago
  In Germany we got 6 months. You can get fired faster in this time (2 weeks) but you can also leave faster. I saw employees and employers use this a few times.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    The probationary periods in France and Germany address a different public policy issue than the trial period we're discussing here. After the probationary period in France expires, it is legally much more difficult to terminate an employee. That need does't exist in the US, where employees can be terminated without cause.
bryanlarsen 11y ago
There are companies without probation periods? I've never seen any. In most companies probation periods are a formality, they're only used for gross incompatibilities. But there are some that use them frequently.
- angelbob 11y ago
  The US has at-will employment in most states, but no explicit probationary period.
RightWingRabble 11y ago
Nobody mentioned senior candidates. Not the linked site or the parent you're replying to. Yes, you may want to have a different hiring practice for the few senior members of your team. You may also want to have a different hiring practice for the CTO. Nobody is suggesting these positions are equivalent and should have equivalent hiring practices.

cballard 11y ago

If you are in the US, what is the difference between the "3 month probation period" and the rest of their employment, since you can fire them at any time anyways?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
jbob2000 11y ago
I'm in Canada and the list of reasons we can fire someone for is very short.
- RightWingRabble 11y ago
  Is performance one of those reasons? Because if it is, the rest of the list doesn't matter.
  - bryanlarsen 11y ago
    Yes, but you must: •set a clear and reasonable standard of performance •communicate the expected level of performance •measure the employee’s performance •take appropriate action to address any concerns •allow a reasonable time for improvement. from: http://www.hrreporter.com/blog/canadian-hr-law/archive/2013/01/09/can-you-dismiss-an-employee-for-cause-due-to-poor-performance#sthash.ovneJL27.dpuf http://www.hrreporter.com/blog/canadian-hr-law/archive/2013/... Which is why pretty much every single employment contract in Canada includes a probationary period.
    - mahyarm 11y ago
      Do Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) style firings get around this?
      - bm1362 11y ago
        I believe PIPs exist to both measure the employee's performance and provide documentation to fire the employee. PIPs exist solely for legal reasons -- it protects the employer from being liable for an unjust firing. I'd be interested to see stats around how many times a PIP turned around and improved the employee.

asadlionpk 11y ago

The 3 month probation method may work with large and stable companies but for a startup, keeping a bad programmer for 3 months will be highly toxic and can actually kill the company.

vonmoltke 11y ago
I think that danger is highly overblown.
- rpedela 11y ago
  A bad hire will drain financial resources yet contribute little to success of the product/company. If a company has a good financial cushion, then you are right that a hiring mistake will not be catastrophic. However if a company is struggling financially then it can be.
jbob2000 11y ago
Well that's the great thing about it being probationary! You don't have to keep them for the whole period, if you realize they aren't a fit in the first week, you can move on.

Jemaclus 11y ago

The big problem with this is that I wouldn't leave my current job for a 3 month contract that may or may not pan out. If I'm currently unemployed, then I might take this risk, but there are other companies who will do the work up front to decide whether I'm a good fit (and them for me), and once I accept the offer, I'm employed for the foreseeable future. The 3 month probation period (or even a 2 week contract, as others suggest) just won't work with senior candidates like me who already have jobs and might just be looking for better opportunities.

eljimmy 11y ago
I would think that if you are confident that you're qualified for the job then you shouldn't need to worry about any probation period. Job security between the two is an illusion. It doesn't matter if you're contract or full-time. You can lose one just as easily as you can lose the other.
- Jemaclus 11y ago
  I'm not sure that's true. (I don't disagree, I'm just not sure.) I think an employer might be more willing to take a risk on a candidate they're not sure of if it's only for a few weeks. "Well, we're 50/50 on this guy, so let's bring him in for 2 weeks and see how it goes." On the other hand, if it's a permanent hire right off the bat, they'll want to be a fair bit better than just 50/50.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 11y ago
    Answers to this would be all over the map, but I'm going with "no." If I/we make a job offer to someone, it's because we think you're a good fit and you will be productive. Bringing someone in for 2 weeks, then someone else in for a month, then another guy for 2 months wastes even more time than just interviewing them each for half a day. Not to mention the uncertainty and morale effects on the rest of the team.
    - Jemaclus 11y ago

droithomme 11y ago

You make good points. For top talent, it's much less stressful and uncertain and more likely to result in gain to just continue working on and publishing one's own products than to deal with the mess of precious entitled thinking that dominates the interviewing and hiring process of the contemporary corporate scene.

tptacek 11y ago

Why would I ever accept a job at a company who treated the first 3 months of my employment as an extended interview, after which I could be released without penalty? When a software accepts a full-time position, they are taking a mammoth pay cut from what they could make 1099 contracting. They do that because the full-time position comes with a commitment to continued employment, so even though they could be making 2x-3x more per day consulting, they don't have to hustle to keep their utilization up. The "3 month probation" thing is essentially a temp-to-perm contacting position. Do you pay people 2x-3x more during that period?

Jemaclus 11y ago
Agree completely. And I wouldn't leave my currently solid job, as much as I might dislike it, for a 3 month contract-to-hire position. That's insanity.
dang 11y ago
> The "3 month probation" thing is essentially a temp-to-perm contacting position. Do you pay people 2x-3x more during that period? What about paying people the 2x-3x more in the event you decide not to keep the hire? Then the mechanism becomes a 3-month option to make the job either full time or a fairly compensated contract.
- tptacek 11y ago
  That would be much more fair.
- atomicUpdate 11y ago
  > What about paying people the 2x-3x more in the event you decide not to keep the hire? This could be pretty easily abused, since it doesn't sound hard to get through the door if they are assuming you're qualified technically. So all you have to do is know just enough to fake it a little bit, then coast for as long as you can to get a big payout at the end.
  - tptacek 11y ago

seanwilson 11y ago

What's wrong with adding a short online programming test at the start of the interview process to weed out clearly unsuitable candidates? Interviews take up a lot of time.

snegu 11y ago

Do employees get full benefits during that probation period? I know I wouldn't be willing to leave a secure job to be uninsured for 3 months.

dominotw 11y ago

ppl sign up for this ? So I have to relocate or stay away from my family for 3 months for some coding job. wtf. And everyday is an "interview" for 3 months where my every move will watched and analyzed? What a strange and disrespectful way to treat people.

jazzyk 11y ago

>Quick phone call to previous employers can save you tons of money Not sure about that - I thought that most companies these days will confirm the dates of past employment and nothing else (for fear of lawsuits). Also, anyone who submits references will make sure that they (the references) speak highly of the job-seeker, even if s/he is a total flake.

TeMPOraL 11y ago
Also someone who's leaving because he couldn't be productive in the environment isn't likely to receive much praise from their ex-employer.

mirimir 11y ago

Consulting works a lot like this. Talking with new clients, they ask if I can do something. I say sure, and by when. If it works, we agree on billing rate. Initial projects are almost always small. Unless they're desperate. If they like what I've done, and are OK about the cost, they come back.

deegles 11y ago

I imagine you don't have a lot of H1B hires. I'm on one and I wouldn't even consider interviewing at a company that did a trial period. It's just too much risk.

orless 11y ago

> Quick phone call to previous employers can save you tons of money! That may be really dangerous for the ex-employer. I'd never comment on an ex-employee beyond confirming that he worked on the given dates. > This is cheaper than having directors and executives try to plan around all sorts of interview stages. From my experience, in the first 3-6 month you invest a whole lot in the new employee. He or she is very far from 100% productive and you also need to assign someone for mentoring which also takes company resources. Bad hires are really expensive. In my previous company I was involved a lot in hiring. After CV screening we normally did a 1-2 hour interview (both technical and non-technical) which was (in a positive case) follow by an offer to spend one day working with us. Finally, a permanent contract with 6 month probation time (standard practice in Germany). We had very high success rate. No bad hires on my memory, low fluctuation, very high employee loyality. The company has stellar employee feedback on kununu.com. The downside was that many applicants were really discouraged by our hiring process. Some people were outraged by the fact that they had to actually write code on the interview. Some thought we the purpose of the probation day was to make the work for free. But that's OK, we've found a lot of great people anyway. Now I'm working for a huge corporation. I'm normally not involved in interviews for permanent positions but I'm always interviewing when staffing external developers my projects. (We staff developers mainly externally.) It's normally 1-hour interview, again both technical as well as non-technical. In any case I can't imagine hiring on the basis of a non-technical interview. Bad hires are just way too expensive.