4 ms·

> Why would you apply for a job you feel only "meh" about? Because I don't know yet. You're not that famous that I would know work conditions at your place fro

by dozzie 9y ago

> Why would you apply for a job you feel only "meh" about? Because I don't know yet. You're not that famous that I would know work conditions at your place from hearing your name only. You need to convince me that you're a good company. (Too many people forget that interviews are not only for company to assess the candidate, but also for candidate to assess the company.) > Why would we want you to [apply for a job I feel only "meh" about]? An employee doesn't need to be all cheery and enthusiastic about the field to do a really good job there. For instance, I couldn't care less about TV, I don't watch it for a long time, but since I started my current job in IPTV, our infrastructure got much more robust, easier to manage and monitor, and easier to extend. And why would you want me to apply? Because I'm a good craftsman, I bring to the table a perspective unusual among the programmers, I like to share my knowledge with colleagues, and I like writing (technical) documentation. It's a ridiculous thing to expect a candidate to be enthusiastic about you before he even got a chance to talk to you. This idea needs to die out.

jacques_chester 9y ago
I feel like we are talking past each other; that you're getting the impression that we're looking for cheerleading rah-rah types. That's not what I intended to convey. What I wanted to convey is that we want people who want to work the way we work: TDD, pairing, sustainable pace, balanced teams, mutual trust. People who hear "Do what works. Do the right thing. Always be kind" and think it shouldn't need to be mottoised in the first place. > Too many people forget that interviews are not only for company to assess the candidate, but also for candidate to assess the company. Absolutely. I've known folk who did great, enjoyed their time, but got the chance to taste the actual job and decide that it wasn't for them. Expanding on your point: wouldn't you want to know what the job is actually like? Because it's not as though trivia contests are a daily part of engineering life. What you see is exactly what you'll get. I got an offer in October of 2013 and I started in February of 2014 (immigration, yay). I spent the first few weeks waiting for the shoe to drop. "This is just like the interviews", I thought. "When does the real job start?" It took a while to realise: this is the job. This is the actual job. There were no surprises. I came in, I interviewed, I had a fantastic time and I've wound up in the best job I've ever had. > And why would you want me to apply? Because I'm a good craftsman, I bring to the table a perspective unusual among the programmers, I like to share my knowledge with colleagues, and I like writing (technical) documentation. Again, I think I gave the wrong impression. It may seem that I am standing in judgement of people who don't want to apply, or prefer not to work the way we prefer, or who think the process is ridiculous. That is not the signal I mean to convey. Let's go back a step. The discussion here is: "how do you conduct coding interviews?", with the assumption that we've reached the coding interview in the first place. Pivotal does that with pairing and frankly it works really, really well for us. Getting to that point is difficult, but we wouldn't do it if we didn't think the net results were terrible.

by dozzie 9y ago

jacques_chester 9y ago

I feel like we are talking past each other; that you're getting the impression that we're looking for cheerleading rah-rah types. That's not what I intended to convey. What I wanted to convey is that we want people who want to work the way we work: TDD, pairing, sustainable pace, balanced teams, mutual trust. People who hear "Do what works. Do the right thing. Always be kind" and think it shouldn't need to be mottoised in the first place. > Too many people forget that interviews are not only for company to assess the candidate, but also for candidate to assess the company. Absolutely. I've known folk who did great, enjoyed their time, but got the chance to taste the actual job and decide that it wasn't for them. Expanding on your point: wouldn't you want to know what the job is actually like? Because it's not as though trivia contests are a daily part of engineering life. What you see is exactly what you'll get. I got an offer in October of 2013 and I started in February of 2014 (immigration, yay). I spent the first few weeks waiting for the shoe to drop. "This is just like the interviews", I thought. "When does the real job start?" It took a while to realise: this is the job. This is the actual job. There were no surprises. I came in, I interviewed, I had a fantastic time and I've wound up in the best job I've ever had. > And why would you want me to apply? Because I'm a good craftsman, I bring to the table a perspective unusual among the programmers, I like to share my knowledge with colleagues, and I like writing (technical) documentation. Again, I think I gave the wrong impression. It may seem that I am standing in judgement of people who don't want to apply, or prefer not to work the way we prefer, or who think the process is ridiculous. That is not the signal I mean to convey. Let's go back a step. The discussion here is: "how do you conduct coding interviews?", with the assumption that we've reached the coding interview in the first place. Pivotal does that with pairing and frankly it works really, really well for us. Getting to that point is difficult, but we wouldn't do it if we didn't think the net results were terrible.