4 ms·

Are you gonna tell your product manager that it will take you 5 days to write a linear solution for your feature? O(n). Are you gonna fix a critical bug in prod

Are you gonna tell your product manager that it will take you 5 days to write a linear solution for your feature? O(n). Are you gonna fix a critical bug in production by using a depth first search instead of a breadth first search? What does it even mean? When are we gonna stop lying to ourselves? The only way to evaluate someone for a software engineer position is to assign a mini coding project. The result should be a working product, packaged and ready to be shipped. It will tell you how fast someone can deliver a solution, how someone would design a solution, code quality, performance, etc. It doesn't have to be a gigantic app or website, just a basic working product and not a basic CS coding question that no one cares about. If you're applying for a backend position then it should be about building a backend. If you're applying for a mobile dev then it should be about building a mobile app, etc. The whole hiring process is a joke, companies like google are focusing too much on college stuff and not enough on reality. Plus look, It's clearly written "Masters Degree in CS" on my Resume, that alone should tell you I already got evaluated on basic CS crap. So, let's talk about what I can really do to help your team and the company. What can I bring on the table besides a Masters Degree?

pradeep_m 10y ago
While I agree that interviews have high variance and a lot of times the interviews don't test what's required for the job, mini projects are a huge time sink for candidates too. Most candidates aren't going to spend a couple of days working on a project just to apply to a company. Unless all companies decide to just switch to using project-based interviewing, interviewing is here to stay (despite its quirks).
- bsvalley 10y ago
  The hiring process in 2017 is: 1. First CS exercise - phone screen (1h) 2. Second CS exercise - phone screen (1h, optional) 3. Onsite (full day of CS exercises on a white board or on a computer) 4. Sometimes you get an extra coding assignment when they still can't make up their mind What I'm saying is that all we need is step 4 + culture fit, which could be done in one single day. So we could get rid of all the other useless steps.
gaius 10y ago
The only way to evaluate someone for a software engineer position is to assign a mini coding project. The result should be a working product, packaged and ready to be shipped. It will tell you how fast someone can deliver a solution This works if your goal is to hire only the currently-unemployed. You will never hire anyone who is currently employed like this. You will probably not even get students who have other options jumping through your hoops. And think about it, no other industry works like this. You don't give a lawyer a case to win or a doctor a patient to cure to assess hiring them...
- hocuspocus 10y ago
  Employed candidates have no problem taking a day off (or two when they live far) for a full round of on-site interviews. Personally I'd much rather work on a 4~5 hours long assignment in my own time. Sadly in my experience, companies that use this approach use it as a way to eliminate phone screenings rather than to make the in person interviews more relevant.
  - EliRivers 10y ago
    "Employed candidates have no problem taking a day off (or two when they live far) for a full round of on-site interviews." Oh. I thought I was an employed candidate who had a problem taking a day or two off for an interview. I must have imagined it.
    - kasey_junk 10y ago
      He meant, it is a common phenomenon in our industry to have full or multi-day interviews and people don't say "you'll only be able to hire unemployed people for that". Programming assignments are usually more flexible for employed people than interview days. But they aren't a panacea. They are hard to design and if you haven't switched to an objective rubric for measuring them, they can be just as subjective as interviews. That said, I whole heartily agree with using programing projects instead of interviews.
- kasey_junk 10y ago

pradeep_m 10y ago

While I agree that interviews have high variance and a lot of times the interviews don't test what's required for the job, mini projects are a huge time sink for candidates too. Most candidates aren't going to spend a couple of days working on a project just to apply to a company. Unless all companies decide to just switch to using project-based interviewing, interviewing is here to stay (despite its quirks).

bsvalley 10y ago
The hiring process in 2017 is: 1. First CS exercise - phone screen (1h) 2. Second CS exercise - phone screen (1h, optional) 3. Onsite (full day of CS exercises on a white board or on a computer) 4. Sometimes you get an extra coding assignment when they still can't make up their mind What I'm saying is that all we need is step 4 + culture fit, which could be done in one single day. So we could get rid of all the other useless steps.

gaius 10y ago

The only way to evaluate someone for a software engineer position is to assign a mini coding project. The result should be a working product, packaged and ready to be shipped. It will tell you how fast someone can deliver a solution This works if your goal is to hire only the currently-unemployed. You will never hire anyone who is currently employed like this. You will probably not even get students who have other options jumping through your hoops. And think about it, no other industry works like this. You don't give a lawyer a case to win or a doctor a patient to cure to assess hiring them...

hocuspocus 10y ago
Employed candidates have no problem taking a day off (or two when they live far) for a full round of on-site interviews. Personally I'd much rather work on a 4~5 hours long assignment in my own time. Sadly in my experience, companies that use this approach use it as a way to eliminate phone screenings rather than to make the in person interviews more relevant.
- EliRivers 10y ago
  "Employed candidates have no problem taking a day off (or two when they live far) for a full round of on-site interviews." Oh. I thought I was an employed candidate who had a problem taking a day or two off for an interview. I must have imagined it.
  - kasey_junk 10y ago
    He meant, it is a common phenomenon in our industry to have full or multi-day interviews and people don't say "you'll only be able to hire unemployed people for that". Programming assignments are usually more flexible for employed people than interview days. But they aren't a panacea. They are hard to design and if you haven't switched to an objective rubric for measuring them, they can be just as subjective as interviews. That said, I whole heartily agree with using programing projects instead of interviews.
kasey_junk 10y ago