7 ms·

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but another example of this problem manifests in the sheer volume of companies that require a HackerRank screening tes

by karterk 11y ago

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but another example of this problem manifests in the sheer volume of companies that require a HackerRank screening test these days. Apart from the clumsy web editor, recording someone under a time constraint means nothing in the larger context of how a programmer's actual work happens. Sigh. By using such automated tests, companies want to identify top talent by taking a shortcut and not investing any time on their side.

neverminder 11y ago
Couldn't agree more with this. Also Codility tests in which fresh graduates do very well and more senior engineers fail, because most of the academical/theoretical/generic stuff is forgotten since it's rarely needed in the real world.
- aduitsis 11y ago
  I've seen people that have solid proven development experience of more than a decade, investing time preparing for coding interviews(!). And, in a perverse way, it makes sense because they know that they are going to be asked to do something their experience has little to do with and most likely forgotten after university.
  - cableshaft 11y ago
    I've had to do that. Doesn't matter that I've been lead programmer on multiple projects and lead teams in developing apps that (at the time) the interviewer could download, play around with, and see my name in the credits... Nope, we aren't even going to ask you anything about that, or let you open up your iPad and show us, here's a whiteboard, start writing up a recursive permutation algorithm (only ever had to do this in programming interviews) because we want to prove you know how to do recursive stuff (and then tell us why you should almost never use recursive solutions in our apps), oh, and how about a red-black tree (algorithms class ran out of time to cover, unneeded since), or how about coding this specific sort (heap, merge, whatever) that you'd almost never use in actuality because there are tried and true libraries that are already more efficient than you'd ever be doing it from scratch? Ugh. Fine, you can do your test, but please don't ignore my prior experience or act like you haven't even given a cursory glance at my resume, or even worse, make a dismissive comment when I talk about it during the interview. It really is insulting. And yet half the interviews I've been in have been like this.
  - JimboOmega 11y ago
    I always try to do, and (especially at say a Google or Facebook) it always pays off; there's always some long forgotten data structure I need for at least one of the questions.
- webjprgm 11y ago
  So a more realistic test would let the candidate use Wikipedia to refresh his/her memory, but then you would need more complex questions that require demonstrating understanding, like being given a chunk of real code and applying the theoretical concept to improve it.
gjjones 11y ago
The context of pressure is also not the same as the pressure from meeting deadlines at work, it is now about proving yourself in some set time. I took one of these recently, and botched one of the tests. Within 10 minutes after the timer was up, I had restarted my solution with a successful answer and was iterating on it. The idea that the pressure is the same doesn't seem to apply to all applicants. Doing work under pressure within set times has been a strength of mine(ex. playing chess against higher rated players or when timer is low). I've noticed, however, that my skills fall apart during interviews. Once again, totally different contexts where you're being tested.
- vonmoltke 11y ago
  > The context of pressure is also not the same as the pressure from meeting deadlines at work, it is now about proving yourself in some set time. I am so tired of hearing the refrain that "we want to see how you work under pressure". Anybody who thinks that all pressure or stress is the same and that you can translate performance in one stressful situation into any and every other one has no business being near a hiring decision.
humanrebar 11y ago
People who ask for more complicated code than "reverse a string" or "fizzbuzz" in a remote code screen is doing it wrong. People who can't code, compile, and run a fizzbuzz in an hour are probably not fit to be hired. Asking someone to implement a proper Diffie-Hellman over Hackerrank is ludicrous, on the other hand. Interviewers should err on the side of stupidly simple problems. A surprising number of people can't code a loop in the languages on their resumes.
- Tenhundfeld 11y ago
  >A surprising number of people can't code a loop in the languages on their resumes. I guess you can reach two conclusions from that: 1) A surprising number of applicants are totally misrepresenting their abilities – either through deceit or wild ignorance. 2) Something about your interview process makes a surprising number of people unable to perform at their normal level – from nervousness, unrealistic and artificial constraints, etc. Certainly many of those applicants fall into the first bucket, but I'm betting a large portion fall into the second. So, you might reconsider whether the false negatives and highly unpleasant experience for many interviewees are worth the perceived value. Maybe there's a better way to get the same insights.
  - webjprgm 11y ago
    Misrepresenting abilities ... yes, I did that in my first job interview. The job posting said PHP, HTML, MySQL skills. Well, I knew HTML well enough but my PHP and MySQL skills were from a few side projects doing copy-paste-modify with PHP BB's code base to make my own web app, which I never did finish. So I only kinda/sorta knew those languages. But then at the end of the interview I was given a coding challenge to do at home over the next few days. PHP and MySQL have good online documentation so I was able to knock it out quickly and I got the job. So, yes I misrepresented my skills, but I also knew I could live up to what I was claiming I could do.
    - shawn-furyan 11y ago
      Yes, it seems that most companies misrepresent their requirements in job postings. It also seems that most candidates misrepresent their skills in responding to those job postings. There's a certain symmetry there. Employer: First job out of school pay, requires four years of experience in our exact tech stack. Candidate: Sure I'm willing to take first job out of school pay (BTW, just graduated in May). Yeah, totally have 4 years of experience, and what do you know, it covers exactly your tech stack!
Raphmedia 11y ago
To me those interviews methods are very helpful. I know to get away from those companies and never come back. If our values differ so much at the interview stage, it won't get any better a few months from now.
odonnellryan 11y ago
I hate technical interviews, but I completely understand the need. However, what I cannot condone is wasting the time of 100 applicants. It takes the employer ten minutes to "sort by best" and start calling down the list. You are 100% right about their time investment. They are saying their time is more important than yours. It is another layer that muddies the process.

by karterk 11y ago

neverminder 11y ago

Couldn't agree more with this. Also Codility tests in which fresh graduates do very well and more senior engineers fail, because most of the academical/theoretical/generic stuff is forgotten since it's rarely needed in the real world.

aduitsis 11y ago
I've seen people that have solid proven development experience of more than a decade, investing time preparing for coding interviews(!). And, in a perverse way, it makes sense because they know that they are going to be asked to do something their experience has little to do with and most likely forgotten after university.
- cableshaft 11y ago
  I've had to do that. Doesn't matter that I've been lead programmer on multiple projects and lead teams in developing apps that (at the time) the interviewer could download, play around with, and see my name in the credits... Nope, we aren't even going to ask you anything about that, or let you open up your iPad and show us, here's a whiteboard, start writing up a recursive permutation algorithm (only ever had to do this in programming interviews) because we want to prove you know how to do recursive stuff (and then tell us why you should almost never use recursive solutions in our apps), oh, and how about a red-black tree (algorithms class ran out of time to cover, unneeded since), or how about coding this specific sort (heap, merge, whatever) that you'd almost never use in actuality because there are tried and true libraries that are already more efficient than you'd ever be doing it from scratch? Ugh. Fine, you can do your test, but please don't ignore my prior experience or act like you haven't even given a cursory glance at my resume, or even worse, make a dismissive comment when I talk about it during the interview. It really is insulting. And yet half the interviews I've been in have been like this.
- JimboOmega 11y ago
  I always try to do, and (especially at say a Google or Facebook) it always pays off; there's always some long forgotten data structure I need for at least one of the questions.
webjprgm 11y ago
So a more realistic test would let the candidate use Wikipedia to refresh his/her memory, but then you would need more complex questions that require demonstrating understanding, like being given a chunk of real code and applying the theoretical concept to improve it.

gjjones 11y ago

The context of pressure is also not the same as the pressure from meeting deadlines at work, it is now about proving yourself in some set time. I took one of these recently, and botched one of the tests. Within 10 minutes after the timer was up, I had restarted my solution with a successful answer and was iterating on it. The idea that the pressure is the same doesn't seem to apply to all applicants. Doing work under pressure within set times has been a strength of mine(ex. playing chess against higher rated players or when timer is low). I've noticed, however, that my skills fall apart during interviews. Once again, totally different contexts where you're being tested.

vonmoltke 11y ago
> The context of pressure is also not the same as the pressure from meeting deadlines at work, it is now about proving yourself in some set time. I am so tired of hearing the refrain that "we want to see how you work under pressure". Anybody who thinks that all pressure or stress is the same and that you can translate performance in one stressful situation into any and every other one has no business being near a hiring decision.

humanrebar 11y ago

People who ask for more complicated code than "reverse a string" or "fizzbuzz" in a remote code screen is doing it wrong. People who can't code, compile, and run a fizzbuzz in an hour are probably not fit to be hired. Asking someone to implement a proper Diffie-Hellman over Hackerrank is ludicrous, on the other hand. Interviewers should err on the side of stupidly simple problems. A surprising number of people can't code a loop in the languages on their resumes.

Tenhundfeld 11y ago
>A surprising number of people can't code a loop in the languages on their resumes. I guess you can reach two conclusions from that: 1) A surprising number of applicants are totally misrepresenting their abilities – either through deceit or wild ignorance. 2) Something about your interview process makes a surprising number of people unable to perform at their normal level – from nervousness, unrealistic and artificial constraints, etc. Certainly many of those applicants fall into the first bucket, but I'm betting a large portion fall into the second. So, you might reconsider whether the false negatives and highly unpleasant experience for many interviewees are worth the perceived value. Maybe there's a better way to get the same insights.
- webjprgm 11y ago
  Misrepresenting abilities ... yes, I did that in my first job interview. The job posting said PHP, HTML, MySQL skills. Well, I knew HTML well enough but my PHP and MySQL skills were from a few side projects doing copy-paste-modify with PHP BB's code base to make my own web app, which I never did finish. So I only kinda/sorta knew those languages. But then at the end of the interview I was given a coding challenge to do at home over the next few days. PHP and MySQL have good online documentation so I was able to knock it out quickly and I got the job. So, yes I misrepresented my skills, but I also knew I could live up to what I was claiming I could do.
  - shawn-furyan 11y ago
    Yes, it seems that most companies misrepresent their requirements in job postings. It also seems that most candidates misrepresent their skills in responding to those job postings. There's a certain symmetry there. Employer: First job out of school pay, requires four years of experience in our exact tech stack. Candidate: Sure I'm willing to take first job out of school pay (BTW, just graduated in May). Yeah, totally have 4 years of experience, and what do you know, it covers exactly your tech stack!

Raphmedia 11y ago

To me those interviews methods are very helpful. I know to get away from those companies and never come back. If our values differ so much at the interview stage, it won't get any better a few months from now.

odonnellryan 11y ago

I hate technical interviews, but I completely understand the need. However, what I cannot condone is wasting the time of 100 applicants. It takes the employer ten minutes to "sort by best" and start calling down the list. You are 100% right about their time investment. They are saying their time is more important than yours. It is another layer that muddies the process.