4 ms·
I’ve worked as a software developer for 20+ years and have hired others many times. People lie on their resumes to an extent that is difficult to believe until
by bgribble 9y ago
I’ve worked as a software developer for 20+ years and have hired others many times. People lie on their resumes to an extent that is difficult to believe until you see it. Sometimes they can talk intelligently about coding in a way that can get them through a “talk about your history” interview (a good interviewer can usually pierce the lies, but a mediocre or inexperienced interviewer might come out thinking they can code).
It’s very hard to guarantee that every first-round interview includes a seasoned lie-detector. A coding exercise is an imperfect, flawed, sometimes insulting approach that’s better than the alternatives.
When done right, it can be a nice conversation about coding, algorithms, and how to collaborate. And prove that the candidate can code.
Personally, I don’t mind being interviewed with a coding exercise even though I could be many of my interviewers’ parent. I love programming and talking about programming with programmers! And it gives me a chance to interview my potential future collaborators in a setting that’s less structured than a sit-across-the-table Q&A.
In my experience, someone who refuses or takes offense at a well-framed coding exercise is probably not going to be someone you want on your team. By well-framed, I mean introduced in a way that’s not insulting on the face of it, like a multi-hour takehome exercise before even meeting the candidate and talking about the job and why you are interested in them as a candidate. That’s just lazy interviewing and I wouldn’t want to do that either.
- saguro 9y agoI agree with everything you said except one bit. > In my experience, someone who refuses or takes offense at a well-framed coding exercise is probably not going to be someone you want on your team. In my experience those who refuse are the top of the top. We adapted our interview and intake process to accommodate these people (usually with a more stringent and goal oriented probation period), and it was the best thing we did in terms of resourcing. The people we took on through this stream ended up being by far the best performing bang for buck employees. They are opinionated and snobby, but that's a good thing, because they actually care about their respective fields enough to have strong opinions. They don't waste time with tests and coding challenges.
- shagie 9y agoThat really depends then on what one is hiring for. An entry level position? Mid level? Senior? or Rock Star? Those who are opinionated and snobby, even if they are the best preforming, may not be the best fit in many environments. A not insignificant portion of a senior developer's time can be spent mentoring people - and the snobby person may not be the best choice for that. If the goal is to hire a team of one - great. If the goal is to hire into a team of half a dozen in what would be termed an enterprise development - the refusal to take a programming test may and work with the process rather than rebel against it may act as a strong indication that the person isn't going to be a good fit.
- saguro 9y agoIf you're hiring for 'enterprise development' you're already outside the interest zone of actually talented developers, so that works out I guess. If you're doing 'enterprise' just pick up a bunch of guys with Agile and Cisco certificates, indian outsourcing will also do just fine.
- thedarkproject 9y agoThis might be the single most arrogant comment I've ever read on HN. At least those enterprise developers perform actual engineering instead of copy pasting the newest JS framework tutorials and pushing pixels around like all the boot camp hipsters without proper CS education nowadays.