12 ms·

I know people consider it condescending if they are actually a competent programmer. However as a person that has done hiring I can't tell you how many people

I know people consider it condescending if they are actually a competent programmer. However as a person that has done hiring I can't tell you how many people have a CS degree that they supposedly attended school and passed(as in their credentials check out) but can't even do the FizzBuzz test. Once time for fun I used one of those online code collaboration tools. I had a couple of "programmers" that were still actively working on the Fizzbuzz question 4 hours later. I went to lunch and forgot about it after I came back until the end of the day and realized there were still people working....

resonanttoe 9y ago
These types of write ups (though sometimes very technically interesting) always have the "Don't you know who I am?" about them, which is very annoying.
gregcoombe 9y ago
Sadly, your experience is not uncommon. I've run across the same thing too many times to count. We tried for a little while to have an online test (HackerRank) before we interviewed, but we removed it when we got feedback that the really good people (who probably already had a job and/or existing offers) just didn't bother.
- mywittyname 9y ago
  I can attest to doing this. It's really unfortunate, because a lot of companies that go through great lengths to ensure they pick good candidates do so because they are small and one bad hire could really hurt the company. But the fact is, larger companies are less discriminant with their hiring, and usually pay better too. So when faced with the option of doing yet another programming quiz for a company or accepting the job offer I have in hand, it makes sense to just accept.
romaniv 9y ago
It is condescending. Asking people to do FizzBuzz indicates that you expect a large portion of your candidates to be completely clueless. That's not a good message to send. Think about the following. FizzBuzz filters out some extreme cases of incompetence, but tells you nothing of value about the people who passed. You can use the same chunk of interview time to ask a more challenging question that will still filter out the extremely incompetent, but also give you some level of confidence in the people who passed. So why would you prefer to ask a question that gives you less useful information? It's not unlike a sorted array search algorithm. To maximize your efficiency you start in the middle, not at some arbitrarily chosen low point.
- dmoy 9y ago
  When interviewing I find that you can't start by asking a really challenging question if you're towards the beginning of the loop. If the candidate happens to bomb that one interview and gets flustered, it can easily tilt them for the remaining interviews which kills the signal you get from those later interviews. So ideally you ask a question that on the surface can be simplified to about fizzbuzz level, but can be seamlessly scaled up to higher difficulty. So yea literal fizzbuzz is bad 'cus it doesn't scale up at all. But a similarly easy question to start with...
- arcticbull 9y ago
  It is condescending (though as an applicant, my reaction is more of a sigh ok, then I waste 30 seconds) and a large portion of applicants aren't the right fit. From my experience interviewing candidates, I find the most effective are multi-part questions where difficulty increases exponentially from step to step. Someone who doesn't do well may only get past the first part (a less clear fizzbuzz) and feel great about it, maybe even learn something. A good person may move onto the much more challenging parts and hopefully teach you something along the way. It's a difficult balance, though I've got a few well-seasoned questions I like to use. Its always cool as an interviewer who has seen hundreds of answers to the question be shown a new and creative way of approaching it.
- dictum 9y ago
  Maybe I'm missing something or it's a personality trait, but I think if you're an expert, being asked to do a FizzBuzz isn't condescending: it's an opportunity to play in speedrun mode. I deeply dislike the job interview culture and whiteboard trickery, but I'm also wary of people who see themselves above mundane requests. That's how you hire someone who leaves code undocumented ("who needs it? I can understand it perfectly"), adopts clever but inscrutable techniques, etc.
  - romaniv 9y ago
    >I'm also wary of people who see themselves above mundane requests. Let me give you an analogy from another domain. "My company requires excellent communication and writing skills, so would you mind talking a 5h grade spelling and grammar test?"
Q6T46nT668w6i3m 9y ago
I spent part of my academic career working on 3SUM. When I was recently asked to solve a subset sum problem in an interview, I completely froze. It was horrible. I couldn’t, for whatever reason, remember how-to loop. Needless to say, I didn’t get the job (and I appreciate the trade-off between true positives and false positives). You don’t need to hire them, but I’d ask you to take the most charitable interpretation of their work.
borplk 9y ago
It is condescending and it says more about your company than anything else. It roughly says "we are so hopeless with the quality of our pipeline of candidates and assessments that we have to make sure you can do FizzBuzz".

resonanttoe 9y ago

These types of write ups (though sometimes very technically interesting) always have the "Don't you know who I am?" about them, which is very annoying.

gregcoombe 9y ago

Sadly, your experience is not uncommon. I've run across the same thing too many times to count. We tried for a little while to have an online test (HackerRank) before we interviewed, but we removed it when we got feedback that the really good people (who probably already had a job and/or existing offers) just didn't bother.

mywittyname 9y ago
I can attest to doing this. It's really unfortunate, because a lot of companies that go through great lengths to ensure they pick good candidates do so because they are small and one bad hire could really hurt the company. But the fact is, larger companies are less discriminant with their hiring, and usually pay better too. So when faced with the option of doing yet another programming quiz for a company or accepting the job offer I have in hand, it makes sense to just accept.

romaniv 9y ago

It is condescending. Asking people to do FizzBuzz indicates that you expect a large portion of your candidates to be completely clueless. That's not a good message to send. Think about the following. FizzBuzz filters out some extreme cases of incompetence, but tells you nothing of value about the people who passed. You can use the same chunk of interview time to ask a more challenging question that will still filter out the extremely incompetent, but also give you some level of confidence in the people who passed. So why would you prefer to ask a question that gives you less useful information? It's not unlike a sorted array search algorithm. To maximize your efficiency you start in the middle, not at some arbitrarily chosen low point.

dmoy 9y ago
When interviewing I find that you can't start by asking a really challenging question if you're towards the beginning of the loop. If the candidate happens to bomb that one interview and gets flustered, it can easily tilt them for the remaining interviews which kills the signal you get from those later interviews. So ideally you ask a question that on the surface can be simplified to about fizzbuzz level, but can be seamlessly scaled up to higher difficulty. So yea literal fizzbuzz is bad 'cus it doesn't scale up at all. But a similarly easy question to start with...
arcticbull 9y ago
It is condescending (though as an applicant, my reaction is more of a sigh ok, then I waste 30 seconds) and a large portion of applicants aren't the right fit. From my experience interviewing candidates, I find the most effective are multi-part questions where difficulty increases exponentially from step to step. Someone who doesn't do well may only get past the first part (a less clear fizzbuzz) and feel great about it, maybe even learn something. A good person may move onto the much more challenging parts and hopefully teach you something along the way. It's a difficult balance, though I've got a few well-seasoned questions I like to use. Its always cool as an interviewer who has seen hundreds of answers to the question be shown a new and creative way of approaching it.
dictum 9y ago
Maybe I'm missing something or it's a personality trait, but I think if you're an expert, being asked to do a FizzBuzz isn't condescending: it's an opportunity to play in speedrun mode. I deeply dislike the job interview culture and whiteboard trickery, but I'm also wary of people who see themselves above mundane requests. That's how you hire someone who leaves code undocumented ("who needs it? I can understand it perfectly"), adopts clever but inscrutable techniques, etc.
- romaniv 9y ago
  >I'm also wary of people who see themselves above mundane requests. Let me give you an analogy from another domain. "My company requires excellent communication and writing skills, so would you mind talking a 5h grade spelling and grammar test?"

Q6T46nT668w6i3m 9y ago

I spent part of my academic career working on 3SUM. When I was recently asked to solve a subset sum problem in an interview, I completely froze. It was horrible. I couldn’t, for whatever reason, remember how-to loop. Needless to say, I didn’t get the job (and I appreciate the trade-off between true positives and false positives). You don’t need to hire them, but I’d ask you to take the most charitable interpretation of their work.

borplk 9y ago

It is condescending and it says more about your company than anything else. It roughly says "we are so hopeless with the quality of our pipeline of candidates and assessments that we have to make sure you can do FizzBuzz".