11 ms·

Agree 100%. Too much focus on happening to have encountered the particular skills you ask about in the technical grilling. Rather, hire smart people you'd like

Agree 100%. Too much focus on happening to have encountered the particular skills you ask about in the technical grilling. Rather, hire smart people you'd like to work with (and who have demonstrated a capacity for learning).

quanticle 10y ago
The problem with that strategy is that all too often, "smart people you'd like to work with" equates to male, white, upper-middle-class, with a fondness for beer.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  Probably depends on the interviewer.
- soft_dev_person 10y ago
  So all interviewers are male, white upper-middle-class with a fondness for beer? Good to know.
  - dguaraglia 10y ago
    Not all, but the vast majority fit exactly that profile. It's not difficult to find evidence of that, just Google for <insert any of hundreds of studies and internal diversity reports by major Silicon Valley companies here>. So yes, they point about "hiring for character might bias the outcome" is still valid.
    - soft_dev_person 10y ago
      I guess, as a person not in the SV sphere, I don't really agree. Maybe I missed the implied SV context.
      - Cthulhu_ 10y ago
        This is HN, a community consisting mostly of middle-upper-class white males orbiting around SV.
  - TheCoelacanth 10y ago
    If you replace "white" with "white, Indian or east Asian" then you are pretty darn close.
- ewar-woowar 10y ago
  Or "plays golf/football, comes from a similar background to us", where gender doesn't play a role, not even in the much-reported IT industry where there is a paucity of women . As a Brit in central Europe I have come up against this, not to the same extent as someone who isn't white, or comes from a markedly different culture, but the differences in culture even between some European nations can be enough that employers do not perceive me as "one of them". What happened to hiring people who are not like us, because that's where the challenge lies and life is better when we are forced to evaluate our own misgivings? A lot of IT people are so similar in personality, skills, hobbies etc that they all fail in the same areas, not just succeed in those areas. My own work place could be better, and produce a better product, if everyone wasn't so like-minded, imo.
  - slgeorge 10y ago
    > What happened to hiring people who are not like us, because that's where the challenge lies and life is better when we are forced to evaluate our own misgivings? I think for many situations that comes down to three things: a. People who don't agree that hiring for diversity is good. While every manager knows that diversity is important (as demonstrated by their responses to HR and while on a training course) I don't believe it's as internalised as people say. Most people subconsciously have strong beliefs of how "people like us" will work together. b. Risk aversion amongst hiring managers Commonly teams have more work to be done than people available: ever known a hiring manager not in a hurry to get a new person in? Taking a perceived risk to hire someone different - whatever that difference is from skillset, gender or background - may not be rewarded when higher management want specific objectives achieved. While in principle it might be nice, pragmatism often dictates that managers go with what they know. c. Inability to measure hiring outcomes How do you measure whether more diverse teams, or occasions when you took a risk worked out? If an individual is successful is that down to good hiring, or is it just random as that particular team happens to be doing well at that moment. It's very difficult to be evidence based in hiring. Consequently, everyone has heuristics for what they think is useful, but there's not much backing it up except gut feel. For example, what evidence is there that people having a "passion" outside work and doing side-projects is inherently better ... none that I know of ... but something that lots of developers and technical managers ask about and a key reason candidates build-up profiles on Github.
- retox 10y ago
  Why is that a problem?
- janvoss 10y ago
  Hi! actually I am the author of the artile ;-) My team looks like this: 4 female one more to come 26 male among these 30 people i have 15+ nationalities. I am a meat lover and drink beer....I have at least 4 people that absolutely never drink and 3 of them are vegetarians. Just by following my principle "smart people that i like to work with" I created a very diverse team. I think the point is: I like to work with people who are different to me, who challenge me, who make me grow as a personality because I learn something new from them. So the key is hidden in the "that i like to work with" and in the definition of "liking someone" ;-)
humanrebar 10y ago
> Too much focus on happening to have encountered the particular skills you ask about in the technical grilling. I agree somewhat, but I've seen many people making mistakes, learning on the job what not to do, and making the entire team learn from their mistakes. So there definitely needs to be some technical experience at the helm of the team to make sure any technical mistakes can be corrected without undue effort. In other words, knowledge, intelligence, understanding, and wisdom are all different things. I'm very excited to hire smart, humble people, but only if my org has some defenses against well-meaning people that are trying out some new technology for the first time. And if a good chunk of the team is smart, inexperienced people, even diligent code review doesn't really cut it.

quanticle 10y ago

The problem with that strategy is that all too often, "smart people you'd like to work with" equates to male, white, upper-middle-class, with a fondness for beer.

paulddraper 10y ago
Probably depends on the interviewer.
soft_dev_person 10y ago
So all interviewers are male, white upper-middle-class with a fondness for beer? Good to know.
- dguaraglia 10y ago
  Not all, but the vast majority fit exactly that profile. It's not difficult to find evidence of that, just Google for <insert any of hundreds of studies and internal diversity reports by major Silicon Valley companies here>. So yes, they point about "hiring for character might bias the outcome" is still valid.
  - soft_dev_person 10y ago
    I guess, as a person not in the SV sphere, I don't really agree. Maybe I missed the implied SV context.
    - Cthulhu_ 10y ago
      This is HN, a community consisting mostly of middle-upper-class white males orbiting around SV.
- TheCoelacanth 10y ago
  If you replace "white" with "white, Indian or east Asian" then you are pretty darn close.
ewar-woowar 10y ago
Or "plays golf/football, comes from a similar background to us", where gender doesn't play a role, not even in the much-reported IT industry where there is a paucity of women . As a Brit in central Europe I have come up against this, not to the same extent as someone who isn't white, or comes from a markedly different culture, but the differences in culture even between some European nations can be enough that employers do not perceive me as "one of them". What happened to hiring people who are not like us, because that's where the challenge lies and life is better when we are forced to evaluate our own misgivings? A lot of IT people are so similar in personality, skills, hobbies etc that they all fail in the same areas, not just succeed in those areas. My own work place could be better, and produce a better product, if everyone wasn't so like-minded, imo.
- slgeorge 10y ago
  > What happened to hiring people who are not like us, because that's where the challenge lies and life is better when we are forced to evaluate our own misgivings? I think for many situations that comes down to three things: a. People who don't agree that hiring for diversity is good. While every manager knows that diversity is important (as demonstrated by their responses to HR and while on a training course) I don't believe it's as internalised as people say. Most people subconsciously have strong beliefs of how "people like us" will work together. b. Risk aversion amongst hiring managers Commonly teams have more work to be done than people available: ever known a hiring manager not in a hurry to get a new person in? Taking a perceived risk to hire someone different - whatever that difference is from skillset, gender or background - may not be rewarded when higher management want specific objectives achieved. While in principle it might be nice, pragmatism often dictates that managers go with what they know. c. Inability to measure hiring outcomes How do you measure whether more diverse teams, or occasions when you took a risk worked out? If an individual is successful is that down to good hiring, or is it just random as that particular team happens to be doing well at that moment. It's very difficult to be evidence based in hiring. Consequently, everyone has heuristics for what they think is useful, but there's not much backing it up except gut feel. For example, what evidence is there that people having a "passion" outside work and doing side-projects is inherently better ... none that I know of ... but something that lots of developers and technical managers ask about and a key reason candidates build-up profiles on Github.
retox 10y ago
Why is that a problem?
janvoss 10y ago
Hi! actually I am the author of the artile ;-) My team looks like this: 4 female one more to come 26 male among these 30 people i have 15+ nationalities. I am a meat lover and drink beer....I have at least 4 people that absolutely never drink and 3 of them are vegetarians. Just by following my principle "smart people that i like to work with" I created a very diverse team. I think the point is: I like to work with people who are different to me, who challenge me, who make me grow as a personality because I learn something new from them. So the key is hidden in the "that i like to work with" and in the definition of "liking someone" ;-)

humanrebar 10y ago

> Too much focus on happening to have encountered the particular skills you ask about in the technical grilling. I agree somewhat, but I've seen many people making mistakes, learning on the job what not to do, and making the entire team learn from their mistakes. So there definitely needs to be some technical experience at the helm of the team to make sure any technical mistakes can be corrected without undue effort. In other words, knowledge, intelligence, understanding, and wisdom are all different things. I'm very excited to hire smart, humble people, but only if my org has some defenses against well-meaning people that are trying out some new technology for the first time. And if a good chunk of the team is smart, inexperienced people, even diligent code review doesn't really cut it.