3 ms·

My rule of thumb was to decline any interview with "challenges" - works perfectly as a filter of perverted corporate climate.

asadlionpk 9y ago
I wonder how would you do hiring for your fictional company? (Assuming you get 100s of shitty dev resumes when you post a job opening)
- juskrey 9y ago
  I am actually hiring for my contracting projects - I just have a general talk and ask for a piece of any recent code. And even this is just a ritual: only real project in your (not other company) real work environment shows.
  - chii 9y ago
    > any recent code which is unlikely to be available if they aren't the owners of the IP. So either you have to guess real lucky, or have a probation period of a week or two with any new hire. Wouldn't you say that's worse than a short take-home project (for the employee)?
    - juskrey 9y ago
      I am not saying I don't have problems with finding people, I am saying here that companies are creating even worse problems by their naive automated HR assumptions.
  - jenscow 9y ago
    Well, if a candidate whipped out code from their work project then I would not hire, as it demonstrates a severe lack of respect of their employer's intellectual property. Of course, unless it was already on Github, etc. [while I'm in the "there's no secrets in software" camp, there are still policies and laws to follow]
- overcast 9y ago
  Honestly, I probably wouldn't hire anyone that doesn't have their own personal side projects. That alone shows ambition, enthusiasm for learning, and it will show you their capability. Otherwise, working for a reputable company? Just because someone does well on a dumb test, doesn't mean much at all.
  - artimaeis 9y ago
    Just to flesh out this hypothetical: You've possibly eliminated a lot of adults who are 10+ years out of college and have family commitments. You've possibly eliminated people with significant side-interests outside the realm of software. Writers, artists, musicians, marathon runners, activists, etc. Just because someone doesn't have side projects doesn't mean that they don't have ambition, enthusiasm for learning, or other ways to show you they're perfectly capable.
    - overcast 9y ago
      Obscure programming tests will also filter out all of your examples. I think finding someone that is genuinely interested in programming, more than just a 9-5, is a better hire than someone who studied "Cracking the Coding Interview". Also, if someone is super dedicated enough to run marathons, I would put them at the top of the list as well. All opinion of course!
      - mootpointer 9y ago
        The issue I take with this opinion as noted above, it selects for people who have available time. I am genuinely interested in programming, but I come home and spend time with my 4 month old son. I think the "more than just a 9-5" idea is a toxic pattern which has been championed by the privileged. In short, by wanting something like this, you risk selecting for a fairly homogenous set of people. I think you can write a good coding challenge which doesn't look like all the others (the socialite example in Takehome.io is particularly good because it scales with skill level – it's not a pass/fail, but a spectrum from just making it work, to showing you have thought about and dealt with an array of odd things that might crop up).
nothrabannosir 9y ago
Isn’t that survivorship bias? How do you know you didn’t pass up on some great opportunities? I’ve met at least some great companies that were a pleasure to work with, who did take homes.
- juskrey 9y ago
  I ended up working 100% remote and never looking back. Sometimes I was taking (remotely) corporate interviews just to be sure I am not missing something, I don't do this anymore. Skype-ing guys who are talking about their great company culture from 2x2 m cubicles was sometimes fun though.
vortico 9y ago
In my experience, whether an interviewer gives a take-home challange has absolutely 0 correlation to the corporate climate. These things are usually decided on a whim by the interviewer, who has no effect on the nature of day-to-day work of an employee. If you ask them, they'll just say "I don't know, just sounded like a good idea. Don't see why not." So you're just filtering based on random noise.
ascorbic 9y ago
I'd love it if I could just hire people who had already done some work for me, or who had a really good Github portfolio. However demanding that rules out loads of other good candidates. I find the take home project to be the best alternative. I normally only give them to people that I expect to interview. I don't expect many to "fail", though it filters out the worst and identifies some stars. I find the conversation that I then have with them about it in the interview is the most useful part.

asadlionpk 9y ago

I wonder how would you do hiring for your fictional company? (Assuming you get 100s of shitty dev resumes when you post a job opening)

juskrey 9y ago
I am actually hiring for my contracting projects - I just have a general talk and ask for a piece of any recent code. And even this is just a ritual: only real project in your (not other company) real work environment shows.
- chii 9y ago
  > any recent code which is unlikely to be available if they aren't the owners of the IP. So either you have to guess real lucky, or have a probation period of a week or two with any new hire. Wouldn't you say that's worse than a short take-home project (for the employee)?
  - juskrey 9y ago
    I am not saying I don't have problems with finding people, I am saying here that companies are creating even worse problems by their naive automated HR assumptions.
- jenscow 9y ago
  Well, if a candidate whipped out code from their work project then I would not hire, as it demonstrates a severe lack of respect of their employer's intellectual property. Of course, unless it was already on Github, etc. [while I'm in the "there's no secrets in software" camp, there are still policies and laws to follow]
overcast 9y ago
Honestly, I probably wouldn't hire anyone that doesn't have their own personal side projects. That alone shows ambition, enthusiasm for learning, and it will show you their capability. Otherwise, working for a reputable company? Just because someone does well on a dumb test, doesn't mean much at all.
- artimaeis 9y ago
  Just to flesh out this hypothetical: You've possibly eliminated a lot of adults who are 10+ years out of college and have family commitments. You've possibly eliminated people with significant side-interests outside the realm of software. Writers, artists, musicians, marathon runners, activists, etc. Just because someone doesn't have side projects doesn't mean that they don't have ambition, enthusiasm for learning, or other ways to show you they're perfectly capable.
  - overcast 9y ago
    Obscure programming tests will also filter out all of your examples. I think finding someone that is genuinely interested in programming, more than just a 9-5, is a better hire than someone who studied "Cracking the Coding Interview". Also, if someone is super dedicated enough to run marathons, I would put them at the top of the list as well. All opinion of course!
    - mootpointer 9y ago
      The issue I take with this opinion as noted above, it selects for people who have available time. I am genuinely interested in programming, but I come home and spend time with my 4 month old son. I think the "more than just a 9-5" idea is a toxic pattern which has been championed by the privileged. In short, by wanting something like this, you risk selecting for a fairly homogenous set of people. I think you can write a good coding challenge which doesn't look like all the others (the socialite example in Takehome.io is particularly good because it scales with skill level – it's not a pass/fail, but a spectrum from just making it work, to showing you have thought about and dealt with an array of odd things that might crop up).

nothrabannosir 9y ago

Isn’t that survivorship bias? How do you know you didn’t pass up on some great opportunities? I’ve met at least some great companies that were a pleasure to work with, who did take homes.

juskrey 9y ago
I ended up working 100% remote and never looking back. Sometimes I was taking (remotely) corporate interviews just to be sure I am not missing something, I don't do this anymore. Skype-ing guys who are talking about their great company culture from 2x2 m cubicles was sometimes fun though.

vortico 9y ago

In my experience, whether an interviewer gives a take-home challange has absolutely 0 correlation to the corporate climate. These things are usually decided on a whim by the interviewer, who has no effect on the nature of day-to-day work of an employee. If you ask them, they'll just say "I don't know, just sounded like a good idea. Don't see why not." So you're just filtering based on random noise.

ascorbic 9y ago

I'd love it if I could just hire people who had already done some work for me, or who had a really good Github portfolio. However demanding that rules out loads of other good candidates. I find the take home project to be the best alternative. I normally only give them to people that I expect to interview. I don't expect many to "fail", though it filters out the worst and identifies some stars. I find the conversation that I then have with them about it in the interview is the most useful part.