9 ms·

FWIW, preparing for interviews is standard practice irrespective of the industry.

NTDF9 9y ago
>> FWIW, preparing for interviews is standard practice irrespective of the industry. Industry is sane. They ask stuff relevant to actual work or real basics. They don't make a gameable process full of rules and techniques.
- bearforcenine 9y ago
  It's been my experience that any industry that * Is attractive enough (compensation, lifestyle, etc.) * and has a larger supply of qualified applicants than desirable positions Will result in applicants preparing for however they are interviewed, tested, etc. This isn't unique to software engineering interviews. People prepare for interviews or exams in finance, law, medicine, etc. They all have a system that is gameable. It might be newer in software engineering interviews, but that is mostly because CS is now incredibly popular and top talent is compensated very well.
  - closeparen 9y ago
    “Interviews or exams” That you think interviews and exams are interchangeable concepts illustrates the problem. Nothing wrong with a rigorous filter at the gates of the profession, but lawyers don’t need to spend months studying for each company’s half-assed version of the bar exam each time they change jobs. Our industry is dysfunctional because, unlike law and medicine, no one trusts the credentialing mechanisms.
    - barry-cotter 9y ago
      What credentialing mechanisms? As we’re told over and over a CS degree is not a trade qualification. Having a CS degree is no guarantee of being able to program either. The example of Microsoft and Cisco qualifications is not stellar either. They’re often seen as a negative signal. And most working programmers don’t have a relevant credential unless you count a Bachelor’s degree which is more a certificate of middle class membership than necessary to work as a programmer.
    - SmirkingRevenge 9y ago
      Our industry also has quite a lot of self-taught professionals, who can perform as well as their college educated counterparts, which is something you won't really get in professions like Law or Medicine. I think that's a good thing, when it comes to software.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - kramer1416 9y ago
        That implies CS degree is a hoax, which is not. The bootcamp style of skilled labour generation is possible simply because of the demand-supply gap.
        sidlls 9y ago
        I'd make a different point: the CS degree isn't a hoax, but it's not strictly necessary for software engineering work. In a real world application systems very quickly escape the boundaries of undergrad CS facts.
        SmirkingRevenge 9y ago
        I don't think so. Computers and software are simply more accessible for laymen to dig into and teach themselves something. You can't learn and practice surgery yourself. On the other hand, you can teach yourself software engineering. You can be practitioner with nothing more than a computer - and so many people are. That doesn't mean CS degrees are a hoax - it just means the field is more accessible to those without college degrees (though its definitely going to be a more difficult path).
      - pjmlp 9y ago
        Just because in countries like US, one can call himself/herself engineer, without any actual meaning. At least in Europe things are a bit more strict.
        Tehnix 9y ago
    - sidlls 9y ago
      Credentialing isn't even the beginning: no one trusts other software companies, either, apparently. An engineer at Google will face a battery of asinine CS trivia when he interviews at FAAN, just the same as he faced interviewing at G. Hell, he might even face similar interviews if he applied at non-FAANG companies.
      - ThrowawayR2 9y ago
        > Credentialing isn't even the beginning: no one trusts other software companies, either, apparently. Even the FAANG companies aren't immune from bad hires or people who burn out.
  - eli_gottlieb 9y ago
    The funny thing is that software engineering does this while also complaining of labor shortages. Or, if we're being a bit more honest, it's not funny, it's cynically self-serving.
    - shagie 9y ago
      I'd be willing to take either side of a debate for "is there a shortage of people who, when given tight specifications for a piece of software (write a function that takes X as input and provides Y as output) that enumerates all of the corner conditions can produce a program in a language that they are familiar with." At the same time, the "person who can work with the business user on the software, think about the architecture of it, identify the design necessary, come up with the estimate that actually matches the time frame that it will be done in with a reasonable error... and produce software that takes X as input and provides Y as output while being aware of where the edge conditions may exist and ask for clarification on how it should work"... I believe there is a distinct lack of that portion of labor. Furthermore, there is also a lack of people who are able to move from the first labor pool to the second, and a lack of mentors who have the time and ability to help that group move to the second. I don't think its incredibly difficult to hire an entry level person as long as one sets the bar low enough and has people within the origination who are capable of providing the design. On the other hand, it is very difficult to find the people who can give the necessary instruction to the entry level people to allow them to become productive within their ability. As an aside, I also find that within the entry level group... there are a sizable portion that have the attitude of "I learned language X and that was hard enough, I'm going to stick with it and not learn anything else." That X can be found for all languages and none have the monopoly on it. However, it is disconcerting for me to see those individuals... I started out as a C programmer, and then Perl (full stack web - some JavaScript in there) and then Java (enterprise), and then Java stand alone (swing application)... and while I'm still a Java programmer, I can see other languages looming on the horizon. Java will become the COBOL, and while there are still COBOL programmers out there, its not something that one wants to get stuck in for another two or three decades waiting for that last app server to be turned off before they can retire.
      - 9y ago
  - NTDF9 9y ago
    I think you'll find this relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MTRxRO5SRA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MTRxRO5SRA
sidlls 9y ago
Depends on what you mean by "preparing". There isn't another engineering industry I can think of where an engineer with more than a couple of years of experience is going to be asked to whiteboard this sort of crap. I mean, my aerospace engineer friends don't have to prepare by reviewing their PDE, vector calculus, and linear algebra classes, which is what the analog to programming interviews of this sort would be.
firstplacelast 9y ago
Sister is a travel nurse. She does not prepare for interviews and typically has several a year. Her entire interview process goes: call the agency and tell them she is looking for a new position, have one to several 30-45minute phone calls with hiring managers at the hospitals she is interested in (she actually took one once in the middle of a wine tasting - and got the job), then wait to hear back. That's what it's like for many other in-demand and well paying industries (she's mid-20's and makes low six figures in San Jose). Stop pretending like everyone else has to deal with the same bullshit as you, hiring in tech is BROKEN. Other industries do it better. People's lives are dependent on how well she does her job. Are the hoops you have to jump through justifiable for how "important" your job is?
- sjg007 9y ago
  Right but she is licensed, this is the main issue.
  - barry-cotter 9y ago
    Indeed. If it was illegal to work as a programmer without a Master’s degree in Computer Science with a GPA above 3.0 the interview process would not look like the current one.
    - sidlls 9y ago
      The industry wouldn't look the same, either: it wouldn't be nearly as profitable or widespread as it has become, and nobody but CS academics would care about it.
      - bitL 9y ago
        All you need to do is to enforce functional programming everywhere and only CS academics would stay ;-)
      - Apocryphon 9y ago
        On the other hand, perhaps the quality of code would go up?
jnbiche 9y ago
> FWIW, preparing for interviews is standard practice irrespective of the industry. This is simply wrong. I suppose if you've spent your whole life as a developer, it may seem like it would be done likewise other industries, but it's not the case. Typically, how you might "prepare" for interviews in other industries is...learning about your potential employer. And maybe reviewing your accomplishments. That's it. And most people don't even do those things. None of this hours and hours reviewing textbooks from your college classes, since you've been in the same job for 5 or 7 years and have forgotten algorithms that you never use in your job. It's simply perverse. Software development is the only industry I'm aware in which technical preparation for job interviews is not only advisable, but increasingly necessary for interviews at all levels of the career hierarchy. Even in other engineering disciplines, this kind of bullshit is unheard of for any interviews except maybe your first interview out of college. And in industries like law, medicine, etc., if a potential employer asked you to perform some random task from a highly technical and complex subject from med school or law school, it would be very unusual.
- vostok 9y ago
  Quantitative finance is quite similar in this regard. Maybe I don't fly high enough to meet people who wouldn't get a technical interview, but I assume that Jeff Dean wouldn't either.
- lr4444lr 9y ago
  I agree completely. And this is why an industry-wide respected, non-profit, credentialing mechanism increasingly makes more sense to me. There are a hundred pitfalls to implementing it and some we may never fully overcome, I'm aware, but I think they're worth grappling with to get this very technical and increasingly high-stakes line of work onto a more solid career footing with its big brothers in the engineering disciplines.
  - geebee 9y ago
    I’ve been coming around to this as well. I don’t object to an industry wide exam based on data structures, algorithms binary operations, and design. My main objection is that the exam is taken repeatedly at each interview and scored under secretive conditions. Actuaries aren’t expected to prepare for and pass a vector calculus and linear algebra exam every time they interview, but they are required to pass a proper exam consistently administered and graded. This might be a big improvement in our field as well.
lr4444lr 9y ago
I think the OP is implying through that this is creeping into top American university curricula. Having a Stanford degree in Comp. Sci. should correlate with interviewing success at relevant job openings for new graduates. This kind of "teaching to the test" and time spent on "job preparedness" is typical of community colleges and trade schools. They serve an important function, but it's distinct from the mission of a place like Stanford. As for the other aspects of job hunting school's career service department can and should handle the soft skills and referrals.
- ramzyo 9y ago
  This comment reeks of elitism. In my experience, new grads from top American universities are incredibly intelligent, but their community college and trade school counterparts score much higher on job preparedness, an incredibly marketable and bankable skill. As someone with a top American university degree, I’d have loved a course in job preparedness, and have learned a ton from coworkers who have succeeded as Software Engineers and also attended community colleges and trade schools.
  - closeparen 9y ago
    Universities exist to search for truth and to train future generations in the methods and results of the ongoing search for truth. We give these institutions donations and tax money so that they can be independent of the economy, and work on what the market won't. You could look at the National Science Foundation and other federal grant programs as a form of basic income, providing grad students with a minimal standard of living so that they can do the important intellectual work that private capital doesn't want to buy. Job preparedness training is looked down upon within universities because it's the banal economy poking its nose where it doesn't belong. The industry or a professional association can and should develop job-preparedness-focused training programs to augment (as in law and medicine) or even replace (as in HVAC repair and precision machining) CS undergrad. Nothing wrong with that. They just don't belong in academic departments. Those are for something else, and industry's training needs shouldn't be subsidized. An employer should value a relevant trade school degree more than it values a Bachelor's, unless it turns out that well-rounded intellectuals with exposure to the underlying discipline perform better than those with direct training in the relevant activities.
booleandilemma 9y ago
Is there any other industry where it's common practice to give job seekers homework during an interview? Or to have job seekers complete an online test proving their skills? https://www.indeed.com/forum/gen/Job-Interviews/Has-anyone-here-ever-used-proveit-com/t370411 https://www.indeed.com/forum/gen/Job-Interviews/Has-anyone-h...
ubernostrum 9y ago
Not quite in the way it is in this industry. What is unusual is that we essentially ask people to set aside and forget everything they know about how to do their jobs, and instead perform a separate set of skills which, since they are't used on the job, must be carefully re-acquired whenever it's time to go interview. No other industry I'm aware of does that.
- brailsafe 9y ago
  Agreed.

>> FWIW, preparing for interviews is standard practice irrespective of the industry. Industry is sane. They ask stuff relevant to actual work or real basics. They don't make a gameable process full of rules and techniques.

bearforcenine 9y ago
It's been my experience that any industry that * Is attractive enough (compensation, lifestyle, etc.) * and has a larger supply of qualified applicants than desirable positions Will result in applicants preparing for however they are interviewed, tested, etc. This isn't unique to software engineering interviews. People prepare for interviews or exams in finance, law, medicine, etc. They all have a system that is gameable. It might be newer in software engineering interviews, but that is mostly because CS is now incredibly popular and top talent is compensated very well.
- closeparen 9y ago
  “Interviews or exams” That you think interviews and exams are interchangeable concepts illustrates the problem. Nothing wrong with a rigorous filter at the gates of the profession, but lawyers don’t need to spend months studying for each company’s half-assed version of the bar exam each time they change jobs. Our industry is dysfunctional because, unlike law and medicine, no one trusts the credentialing mechanisms.
  - barry-cotter 9y ago
    What credentialing mechanisms? As we’re told over and over a CS degree is not a trade qualification. Having a CS degree is no guarantee of being able to program either. The example of Microsoft and Cisco qualifications is not stellar either. They’re often seen as a negative signal. And most working programmers don’t have a relevant credential unless you count a Bachelor’s degree which is more a certificate of middle class membership than necessary to work as a programmer.
  - SmirkingRevenge 9y ago
    Our industry also has quite a lot of self-taught professionals, who can perform as well as their college educated counterparts, which is something you won't really get in professions like Law or Medicine. I think that's a good thing, when it comes to software.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - kramer1416 9y ago
      That implies CS degree is a hoax, which is not. The bootcamp style of skilled labour generation is possible simply because of the demand-supply gap.
      - sidlls 9y ago
        I'd make a different point: the CS degree isn't a hoax, but it's not strictly necessary for software engineering work. In a real world application systems very quickly escape the boundaries of undergrad CS facts.
      - SmirkingRevenge 9y ago
        I don't think so. Computers and software are simply more accessible for laymen to dig into and teach themselves something. You can't learn and practice surgery yourself. On the other hand, you can teach yourself software engineering. You can be practitioner with nothing more than a computer - and so many people are. That doesn't mean CS degrees are a hoax - it just means the field is more accessible to those without college degrees (though its definitely going to be a more difficult path).
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      Just because in countries like US, one can call himself/herself engineer, without any actual meaning. At least in Europe things are a bit more strict.
      - Tehnix 9y ago
  - sidlls 9y ago
    Credentialing isn't even the beginning: no one trusts other software companies, either, apparently. An engineer at Google will face a battery of asinine CS trivia when he interviews at FAAN, just the same as he faced interviewing at G. Hell, he might even face similar interviews if he applied at non-FAANG companies.
    - ThrowawayR2 9y ago
      > Credentialing isn't even the beginning: no one trusts other software companies, either, apparently. Even the FAANG companies aren't immune from bad hires or people who burn out.
- eli_gottlieb 9y ago
  The funny thing is that software engineering does this while also complaining of labor shortages. Or, if we're being a bit more honest, it's not funny, it's cynically self-serving.
  - shagie 9y ago
    I'd be willing to take either side of a debate for "is there a shortage of people who, when given tight specifications for a piece of software (write a function that takes X as input and provides Y as output) that enumerates all of the corner conditions can produce a program in a language that they are familiar with." At the same time, the "person who can work with the business user on the software, think about the architecture of it, identify the design necessary, come up with the estimate that actually matches the time frame that it will be done in with a reasonable error... and produce software that takes X as input and provides Y as output while being aware of where the edge conditions may exist and ask for clarification on how it should work"... I believe there is a distinct lack of that portion of labor. Furthermore, there is also a lack of people who are able to move from the first labor pool to the second, and a lack of mentors who have the time and ability to help that group move to the second. I don't think its incredibly difficult to hire an entry level person as long as one sets the bar low enough and has people within the origination who are capable of providing the design. On the other hand, it is very difficult to find the people who can give the necessary instruction to the entry level people to allow them to become productive within their ability. As an aside, I also find that within the entry level group... there are a sizable portion that have the attitude of "I learned language X and that was hard enough, I'm going to stick with it and not learn anything else." That X can be found for all languages and none have the monopoly on it. However, it is disconcerting for me to see those individuals... I started out as a C programmer, and then Perl (full stack web - some JavaScript in there) and then Java (enterprise), and then Java stand alone (swing application)... and while I'm still a Java programmer, I can see other languages looming on the horizon. Java will become the COBOL, and while there are still COBOL programmers out there, its not something that one wants to get stuck in for another two or three decades waiting for that last app server to be turned off before they can retire.
    - 9y ago
- NTDF9 9y ago
  I think you'll find this relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MTRxRO5SRA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MTRxRO5SRA

sidlls 9y ago

Depends on what you mean by "preparing". There isn't another engineering industry I can think of where an engineer with more than a couple of years of experience is going to be asked to whiteboard this sort of crap. I mean, my aerospace engineer friends don't have to prepare by reviewing their PDE, vector calculus, and linear algebra classes, which is what the analog to programming interviews of this sort would be.

firstplacelast 9y ago

Sister is a travel nurse. She does not prepare for interviews and typically has several a year. Her entire interview process goes: call the agency and tell them she is looking for a new position, have one to several 30-45minute phone calls with hiring managers at the hospitals she is interested in (she actually took one once in the middle of a wine tasting - and got the job), then wait to hear back. That's what it's like for many other in-demand and well paying industries (she's mid-20's and makes low six figures in San Jose). Stop pretending like everyone else has to deal with the same bullshit as you, hiring in tech is BROKEN. Other industries do it better. People's lives are dependent on how well she does her job. Are the hoops you have to jump through justifiable for how "important" your job is?

sjg007 9y ago
Right but she is licensed, this is the main issue.
- barry-cotter 9y ago
  Indeed. If it was illegal to work as a programmer without a Master’s degree in Computer Science with a GPA above 3.0 the interview process would not look like the current one.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    The industry wouldn't look the same, either: it wouldn't be nearly as profitable or widespread as it has become, and nobody but CS academics would care about it.
    - bitL 9y ago
      All you need to do is to enforce functional programming everywhere and only CS academics would stay ;-)
    - Apocryphon 9y ago
      On the other hand, perhaps the quality of code would go up?

jnbiche 9y ago

> FWIW, preparing for interviews is standard practice irrespective of the industry. This is simply wrong. I suppose if you've spent your whole life as a developer, it may seem like it would be done likewise other industries, but it's not the case. Typically, how you might "prepare" for interviews in other industries is...learning about your potential employer. And maybe reviewing your accomplishments. That's it. And most people don't even do those things. None of this hours and hours reviewing textbooks from your college classes, since you've been in the same job for 5 or 7 years and have forgotten algorithms that you never use in your job. It's simply perverse. Software development is the only industry I'm aware in which technical preparation for job interviews is not only advisable, but increasingly necessary for interviews at all levels of the career hierarchy. Even in other engineering disciplines, this kind of bullshit is unheard of for any interviews except maybe your first interview out of college. And in industries like law, medicine, etc., if a potential employer asked you to perform some random task from a highly technical and complex subject from med school or law school, it would be very unusual.

vostok 9y ago
Quantitative finance is quite similar in this regard. Maybe I don't fly high enough to meet people who wouldn't get a technical interview, but I assume that Jeff Dean wouldn't either.
lr4444lr 9y ago
I agree completely. And this is why an industry-wide respected, non-profit, credentialing mechanism increasingly makes more sense to me. There are a hundred pitfalls to implementing it and some we may never fully overcome, I'm aware, but I think they're worth grappling with to get this very technical and increasingly high-stakes line of work onto a more solid career footing with its big brothers in the engineering disciplines.
- geebee 9y ago
  I’ve been coming around to this as well. I don’t object to an industry wide exam based on data structures, algorithms binary operations, and design. My main objection is that the exam is taken repeatedly at each interview and scored under secretive conditions. Actuaries aren’t expected to prepare for and pass a vector calculus and linear algebra exam every time they interview, but they are required to pass a proper exam consistently administered and graded. This might be a big improvement in our field as well.

lr4444lr 9y ago

I think the OP is implying through that this is creeping into top American university curricula. Having a Stanford degree in Comp. Sci. should correlate with interviewing success at relevant job openings for new graduates. This kind of "teaching to the test" and time spent on "job preparedness" is typical of community colleges and trade schools. They serve an important function, but it's distinct from the mission of a place like Stanford. As for the other aspects of job hunting school's career service department can and should handle the soft skills and referrals.

ramzyo 9y ago
This comment reeks of elitism. In my experience, new grads from top American universities are incredibly intelligent, but their community college and trade school counterparts score much higher on job preparedness, an incredibly marketable and bankable skill. As someone with a top American university degree, I’d have loved a course in job preparedness, and have learned a ton from coworkers who have succeeded as Software Engineers and also attended community colleges and trade schools.
- closeparen 9y ago
  Universities exist to search for truth and to train future generations in the methods and results of the ongoing search for truth. We give these institutions donations and tax money so that they can be independent of the economy, and work on what the market won't. You could look at the National Science Foundation and other federal grant programs as a form of basic income, providing grad students with a minimal standard of living so that they can do the important intellectual work that private capital doesn't want to buy. Job preparedness training is looked down upon within universities because it's the banal economy poking its nose where it doesn't belong. The industry or a professional association can and should develop job-preparedness-focused training programs to augment (as in law and medicine) or even replace (as in HVAC repair and precision machining) CS undergrad. Nothing wrong with that. They just don't belong in academic departments. Those are for something else, and industry's training needs shouldn't be subsidized. An employer should value a relevant trade school degree more than it values a Bachelor's, unless it turns out that well-rounded intellectuals with exposure to the underlying discipline perform better than those with direct training in the relevant activities.

booleandilemma 9y ago

Is there any other industry where it's common practice to give job seekers homework during an interview? Or to have job seekers complete an online test proving their skills? https://www.indeed.com/forum/gen/Job-Interviews/Has-anyone-here-ever-used-proveit-com/t370411 https://www.indeed.com/forum/gen/Job-Interviews/Has-anyone-h...

ubernostrum 9y ago

Not quite in the way it is in this industry. What is unusual is that we essentially ask people to set aside and forget everything they know about how to do their jobs, and instead perform a separate set of skills which, since they are't used on the job, must be carefully re-acquired whenever it's time to go interview. No other industry I'm aware of does that.

brailsafe 9y ago
Agreed.