5 ms·

Why though? Why is programming seemingly the only field where companies feel the need to put up these super interview processes with mutiple interview rounds, t

by auxym 9y ago

Why though? Why is programming seemingly the only field where companies feel the need to put up these super interview processes with mutiple interview rounds, technical tests, white boarding, etc? Is it the high salaries? In that case, do you see such testing in law, or finance? Is it the technical difficulty? In a previous life (read: up to a few months ago) I worked as a mechanical engineer, in a pretty technical field (numerical simulation of structures). Additionally to demanding reasonably deep knowledge in a few areas, the job came with the responsibility of making sure that your designs do not kill or injure people. I had never had a technical test in an interview before I interviewed for my current IT position. Nor have I heard of colleagues having such a test. Is it because most engineers in Canada are licensed (myself included), and most jobs require you be licensed? If that's the case, it's pretty funny, because at least in my province, the test you have to pass for the license is entirely about ethics and professionalism, nothing technical. Part of the code of ethics though, is that it's on you as a professional to ensure you have the necessary competence to do the work.

meri_dian 9y ago
You're kidding, right? That other industries don't have high entry barriers? Just some I can name off the top of my head... Medicine, law, pharmacy, actuarial science, accounting... For most upper class jobs it's the norm.
- auxym 9y ago
  I edited my post to reflect my meaning better. I didn't mean high barriers generally, such as a degree, because that definitely isn't specific to software. I was thinking of the complicated interview process, which seems rather exclusive to software, at least as far as I know. Medicine, pharmacy, actuarial are all licensed professions. A lot (most?) law and accounting practitioners are also licensed. So, is the difference for software that it doesn't require a professional license, so employers are forced to sort of invent their own "licensing" in the form of these very difficult interviews? Not that I'm advocating for licensing by the way, it comes with its own set of problems (notably rent seeking behavior). Just trying to understand why software as a field seems to stand out here.
  - kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
    You answered your question. A degree is also a kind of 'license' (albeit a weaker form than a so-called professional license) but people frown at using them because it sounds credentialist.
    - vonmoltke 9y ago
      This industry hates credentials because it doesn't trust credentials. Which makes it ironic when it's members come here and say other disciplines don't have the same issues as soon us because credentials.
      - fjsolwmv 9y ago
        People who don't have credentials don't like credentials
        dajohnson89 9y ago
        same goes for privilege
  - booleandilemma 9y ago
    When you have a job that pays a lot of money and requires no formal credentials whatsoever, people can and will try to get into that job even though they’re not qualified for it. This is why there are programming candidates failing fizzbuzz. It’s the equivalent of someone applying for a pharmacist position and not knowing what antibiotics are, but it happens, because anyone can call themselves a programmer.
  - dmoy 9y ago
    Yea I think it is precisely that. When I interview at AmaGoogFaceSoft, they can't take my word for it that I know how to code my way out of a cardboard box. So my interviews tend to be fairly technical, making me prove that I know what I know, and might actually be a useful asset to the company. When my wife (a CPA) interviews, they know that she knows a whole bunch of stuff, by virtue of being able to go the accreditation board. So when she interviews, it tends to be a super mile high sanity check (have you done accounts receivable/payable before, yes? no? If no that's ok too...) I can't speak for medical, but I have family in law and it tends to lean a lot more towards the accounting style for interviewing (barring maybe some patent law or other specializations). E.g. one had an interview for a corporate banking regulatory position that went roughly "Oh you have no experience in banking or regulatory law? Well that's ok, welcome aboard anyways."
jamestimmins 9y ago
A big part of it, which you allude to, is that many people are either self taught entirely, or having studied CS during undergrad, are self taught in practical software development. In a field like mechanical engineering, I assume an employer can take for granted that a new grad has a certain set of skills (general physics, structures, fluids, etc.). That can't be assumed in quite the same way in software engineering.
- auxym 9y ago
  Interesting thought, since I don't have a degree in CS, I'm not sure what it entails. Does it not include any "practical programming" at all? In that case, should we conclude that universities are the failing piece here, and that is why even with a 4 year degree, employers feel the need to test candidates for their knowledge?
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    No, CS degrees are designed to teach computer science. That's sort of vaguely related to "practical programming." Software engineering the way it's done in most companies is almost nothing like computer science and very much like a trade. The real problem is that programming trade schools are viewed as "below" a CS degree rather than a more directly applicable training/education.
    - walshemj 9y ago
      The better analogy is to compare a theoretical physics degree to a mech civil or electrical engineering degree.
      - kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
        Not really, because unlike trade degrees, mech civil or elec engg degrees are prestigious, and often even more so than theoretical physics.
      - closeparen 9y ago
kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
I think it's a multitude of factors. These jobs 1. Pay a lot. Barring trading, you'd be hard pressed to find a job that routinely pays 200K+ to 25-year olds 2. Are, at least most of them, not fundamentally difficult for a generally smart person, despite whatever people convince themselves of. I am not talking of the so-called 10x engineers here, who you are unlikely to find through standard interview techniques. 3. Pride themselves on NOT being credentialist (at least on the surface). You can't wake up tomorrow wanting to be a lawyer, read some books, and get a good job offer in a couple months. It's possible for CS jobs.
- enraged_camel 9y ago
  >>Barring trading, you'd be hard pressed to find a job that routinely pays 200K+ to 25-year olds Routinely? Hahaha. Those salaries are pretty much exclusive to a few locations, primarily Bay Area and maybe NYC.
  - kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
    Not sure why you are laughing. Bay area is the hub of the so-called CS job industry and the cult-ish hiring practices that are being discussed in this thread largely originate from there and are used there.
  - alexeldeib 9y ago
    I'm not sure I understand this comment -- seems like you wholly agree with the sentiment you quoted? You might be hard-pressed outside of the cities you mentioned, but they are highly plausible in those and other cities (e.g. Seattle).
travisjungroth 9y ago
I've been both a professional pilot and software engineer. The process to become a pilot was more intense in time and cost than to become a software engineer. The interview process for a job as a pilot is much easier than the interview process for a job as a software engineer. The barrier to entry for software engineer jobs is all at the interview. That's why it's so hard, tedious, and complicated.
- quickben 9y ago
  Imagine if this article was intended for pilots and it said: "How to interview entry level pilots for A380. On the job training provided if you are fresh graduate" I'm aware it's a regulated profession, but imagine if it wasn't? Whats there to stop management from actually fast tracking the backup pilots as that?
  - travisjungroth 9y ago
    That's kinda how it works in Asia. You sign a seven year contract, they send you to a flight school where you learn the basics, and they stick you as like fifth-in-command in an airliner. At some airlines you have to work for the company in some other capacity first.
  - gaius 9y ago
    On the job training provided if you are fresh graduate That is, in fact, how every Air Force in the world recruits pilots.
jasode 9y ago
>, or finance? Tricky brainteaser questions are popular in quant finance interviewing. Example[1]. There are also discussion forums dedicated to it. Example[2]. Some electrical engineering firms will ask you to analyze complicated circuits in the interview. Some even have "take home tests" where the candidates design a circuit according to the interviewer's specification. [1] http://www.streetofwalls.com/finance-training-courses/quantitative-hedge-fund-training/quant-interview-questions-answers/ http://www.streetofwalls.com/finance-training-courses/quanti... [2] https://www.quantnet.com/forum/quant-interviews.41/ https://www.quantnet.com/forum/quant-interviews.41/
0xffff2 9y ago
Are your sure it's just software? I work in the aerospace field, where we hire pretty much ever kind of engineer there is. The hiring process looks pretty similar to me for all engineering disciplines.
DoreenMichele 9y ago
It might be because writing code is as close to magic as you can get. It does real world things, like banking and long distance communication, but it is invisible and in an arcane tongue. If I see a bridge, I don't need to be an engineer to gauge if it is likely to support my weight. But if the bridge is invisible, I probably want significant assurance that no one is pulling a fast one here, so to speak.

by auxym 9y ago

meri_dian 9y ago

You're kidding, right? That other industries don't have high entry barriers? Just some I can name off the top of my head... Medicine, law, pharmacy, actuarial science, accounting... For most upper class jobs it's the norm.

auxym 9y ago
I edited my post to reflect my meaning better. I didn't mean high barriers generally, such as a degree, because that definitely isn't specific to software. I was thinking of the complicated interview process, which seems rather exclusive to software, at least as far as I know. Medicine, pharmacy, actuarial are all licensed professions. A lot (most?) law and accounting practitioners are also licensed. So, is the difference for software that it doesn't require a professional license, so employers are forced to sort of invent their own "licensing" in the form of these very difficult interviews? Not that I'm advocating for licensing by the way, it comes with its own set of problems (notably rent seeking behavior). Just trying to understand why software as a field seems to stand out here.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
  You answered your question. A degree is also a kind of 'license' (albeit a weaker form than a so-called professional license) but people frown at using them because it sounds credentialist.
  - vonmoltke 9y ago
    This industry hates credentials because it doesn't trust credentials. Which makes it ironic when it's members come here and say other disciplines don't have the same issues as soon us because credentials.
    - fjsolwmv 9y ago
      People who don't have credentials don't like credentials
      - dajohnson89 9y ago
        same goes for privilege
- booleandilemma 9y ago
  When you have a job that pays a lot of money and requires no formal credentials whatsoever, people can and will try to get into that job even though they’re not qualified for it. This is why there are programming candidates failing fizzbuzz. It’s the equivalent of someone applying for a pharmacist position and not knowing what antibiotics are, but it happens, because anyone can call themselves a programmer.
- dmoy 9y ago
  Yea I think it is precisely that. When I interview at AmaGoogFaceSoft, they can't take my word for it that I know how to code my way out of a cardboard box. So my interviews tend to be fairly technical, making me prove that I know what I know, and might actually be a useful asset to the company. When my wife (a CPA) interviews, they know that she knows a whole bunch of stuff, by virtue of being able to go the accreditation board. So when she interviews, it tends to be a super mile high sanity check (have you done accounts receivable/payable before, yes? no? If no that's ok too...) I can't speak for medical, but I have family in law and it tends to lean a lot more towards the accounting style for interviewing (barring maybe some patent law or other specializations). E.g. one had an interview for a corporate banking regulatory position that went roughly "Oh you have no experience in banking or regulatory law? Well that's ok, welcome aboard anyways."

jamestimmins 9y ago

A big part of it, which you allude to, is that many people are either self taught entirely, or having studied CS during undergrad, are self taught in practical software development. In a field like mechanical engineering, I assume an employer can take for granted that a new grad has a certain set of skills (general physics, structures, fluids, etc.). That can't be assumed in quite the same way in software engineering.

auxym 9y ago
Interesting thought, since I don't have a degree in CS, I'm not sure what it entails. Does it not include any "practical programming" at all? In that case, should we conclude that universities are the failing piece here, and that is why even with a 4 year degree, employers feel the need to test candidates for their knowledge?
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  No, CS degrees are designed to teach computer science. That's sort of vaguely related to "practical programming." Software engineering the way it's done in most companies is almost nothing like computer science and very much like a trade. The real problem is that programming trade schools are viewed as "below" a CS degree rather than a more directly applicable training/education.
  - walshemj 9y ago
    The better analogy is to compare a theoretical physics degree to a mech civil or electrical engineering degree.
    - kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
      Not really, because unlike trade degrees, mech civil or elec engg degrees are prestigious, and often even more so than theoretical physics.
    - closeparen 9y ago

kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago

I think it's a multitude of factors. These jobs 1. Pay a lot. Barring trading, you'd be hard pressed to find a job that routinely pays 200K+ to 25-year olds 2. Are, at least most of them, not fundamentally difficult for a generally smart person, despite whatever people convince themselves of. I am not talking of the so-called 10x engineers here, who you are unlikely to find through standard interview techniques. 3. Pride themselves on NOT being credentialist (at least on the surface). You can't wake up tomorrow wanting to be a lawyer, read some books, and get a good job offer in a couple months. It's possible for CS jobs.

enraged_camel 9y ago
>>Barring trading, you'd be hard pressed to find a job that routinely pays 200K+ to 25-year olds Routinely? Hahaha. Those salaries are pretty much exclusive to a few locations, primarily Bay Area and maybe NYC.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
  Not sure why you are laughing. Bay area is the hub of the so-called CS job industry and the cult-ish hiring practices that are being discussed in this thread largely originate from there and are used there.
- alexeldeib 9y ago
  I'm not sure I understand this comment -- seems like you wholly agree with the sentiment you quoted? You might be hard-pressed outside of the cities you mentioned, but they are highly plausible in those and other cities (e.g. Seattle).

travisjungroth 9y ago

I've been both a professional pilot and software engineer. The process to become a pilot was more intense in time and cost than to become a software engineer. The interview process for a job as a pilot is much easier than the interview process for a job as a software engineer. The barrier to entry for software engineer jobs is all at the interview. That's why it's so hard, tedious, and complicated.

quickben 9y ago
Imagine if this article was intended for pilots and it said: "How to interview entry level pilots for A380. On the job training provided if you are fresh graduate" I'm aware it's a regulated profession, but imagine if it wasn't? Whats there to stop management from actually fast tracking the backup pilots as that?
- travisjungroth 9y ago
  That's kinda how it works in Asia. You sign a seven year contract, they send you to a flight school where you learn the basics, and they stick you as like fifth-in-command in an airliner. At some airlines you have to work for the company in some other capacity first.
- gaius 9y ago
  On the job training provided if you are fresh graduate That is, in fact, how every Air Force in the world recruits pilots.

jasode 9y ago

>, or finance? Tricky brainteaser questions are popular in quant finance interviewing. Example[1]. There are also discussion forums dedicated to it. Example[2]. Some electrical engineering firms will ask you to analyze complicated circuits in the interview. Some even have "take home tests" where the candidates design a circuit according to the interviewer's specification. [1] http://www.streetofwalls.com/finance-training-courses/quantitative-hedge-fund-training/quant-interview-questions-answers/ http://www.streetofwalls.com/finance-training-courses/quanti... [2] https://www.quantnet.com/forum/quant-interviews.41/ https://www.quantnet.com/forum/quant-interviews.41/

0xffff2 9y ago

Are your sure it's just software? I work in the aerospace field, where we hire pretty much ever kind of engineer there is. The hiring process looks pretty similar to me for all engineering disciplines.

DoreenMichele 9y ago

It might be because writing code is as close to magic as you can get. It does real world things, like banking and long distance communication, but it is invisible and in an arcane tongue. If I see a bridge, I don't need to be an engineer to gauge if it is likely to support my weight. But if the bridge is invisible, I probably want significant assurance that no one is pulling a fast one here, so to speak.