5 ms·

underrepresented candidates have been acing our whiteboard interviews, and getting hired. The whole meme is so stupid I want to cry. "Asking field-relevant qu

underrepresented candidates have been acing our whiteboard interviews, and getting hired. The whole meme is so stupid I want to cry. "Asking field-relevant questions with objective answers is discriminatory, instead just have a chat. " Mother of god. Yes I understand the limitations and downsides of whiteboard questions, and in fact in future I'm thinking I won't do them on white boards anymore. But I'll still be asking people who claim to be programmers to do some basic programming before I hire them.

entee 10y ago
I think the point is if someone is under-represented and they merely do "OK" on the whiteboard, other latent biases might downgrade the candidate in the final analysis. I do think it's relevant to ask people to code in some form, but this article makes me rethink the things I'm going to look for in those interview questions. Also, perhaps more useful might be to give them a small problem before they come in to the interview (1-2h work at most) and then go over it with them as part of the interview. That way you evaluate better how they work on a team, explain their thought process and actually do the job they'll be hired to do.
- jackmott 10y ago
  >I think the point is if someone is under-represented and they merely do "OK" on the whiteboard, other latent biases might downgrade the candidate in the final analysis But if you don't do a whiteboard interview, everyone is by default only OK. Biases rule the day. If you do a whiteboard interview, then at least they get a chance to do great and defy your biases.
sp332 10y ago
Asking them to do real programming is good. Asking them to remember things from an irrelevant layer of abstraction and write code in a way that is very unlike the actual job is the problem.
ebola1717 10y ago
The alternative is not no technical interviews, but it is important to recognize that different interview styles have different biases. Like a take home problem is biased against programmers with young kids. Whiteboarding is often a skill in itself, and as a result, you end up selecting for people that have the resources to study and practice whiteboarding. I learned how to whiteboard through peers and career programs in college. There's a lot of people that don't have that guidance, or all those people to practice with. And there's a lot of people that will believe that flailing in their first whiteboard interview means they're unqualified to be a programmer, not realizing that it's a skill in itself. Whiteboard questions also tend to be the nonsensical algorithms that you memorize for interviews and never use in practice, which again is influenced by one's peer group - you learn, study, and practice together. This also is why race and gender matter, even when you control for income and education. The point isn't that these are insurmountable for someone from untraditional circumstances, but it is harder. And that means you let in weaker candidates with more advantaged upbringings in favor of stronger ones with less traditional ones. This is why google offers a seminar for all its interviewees to give them interview practice - so that people can start from a more equal playing field. Obviously, a lot of the alternatives suffer from the same issues. But like all good programmers, I believe 1. this analysis and process is more important than the specific implementations, and 2. by understanding the issues and looking at the data, we can iterate to better solutions.

entee 10y ago

I think the point is if someone is under-represented and they merely do "OK" on the whiteboard, other latent biases might downgrade the candidate in the final analysis. I do think it's relevant to ask people to code in some form, but this article makes me rethink the things I'm going to look for in those interview questions. Also, perhaps more useful might be to give them a small problem before they come in to the interview (1-2h work at most) and then go over it with them as part of the interview. That way you evaluate better how they work on a team, explain their thought process and actually do the job they'll be hired to do.

jackmott 10y ago
>I think the point is if someone is under-represented and they merely do "OK" on the whiteboard, other latent biases might downgrade the candidate in the final analysis But if you don't do a whiteboard interview, everyone is by default only OK. Biases rule the day. If you do a whiteboard interview, then at least they get a chance to do great and defy your biases.

sp332 10y ago

Asking them to do real programming is good. Asking them to remember things from an irrelevant layer of abstraction and write code in a way that is very unlike the actual job is the problem.

ebola1717 10y ago

The alternative is not no technical interviews, but it is important to recognize that different interview styles have different biases. Like a take home problem is biased against programmers with young kids. Whiteboarding is often a skill in itself, and as a result, you end up selecting for people that have the resources to study and practice whiteboarding. I learned how to whiteboard through peers and career programs in college. There's a lot of people that don't have that guidance, or all those people to practice with. And there's a lot of people that will believe that flailing in their first whiteboard interview means they're unqualified to be a programmer, not realizing that it's a skill in itself. Whiteboard questions also tend to be the nonsensical algorithms that you memorize for interviews and never use in practice, which again is influenced by one's peer group - you learn, study, and practice together. This also is why race and gender matter, even when you control for income and education. The point isn't that these are insurmountable for someone from untraditional circumstances, but it is harder. And that means you let in weaker candidates with more advantaged upbringings in favor of stronger ones with less traditional ones. This is why google offers a seminar for all its interviewees to give them interview practice - so that people can start from a more equal playing field. Obviously, a lot of the alternatives suffer from the same issues. But like all good programmers, I believe 1. this analysis and process is more important than the specific implementations, and 2. by understanding the issues and looking at the data, we can iterate to better solutions.