5 ms·

>There is always a shortage of good jobs. If their hiring process involves jumping through hoops before being granted permission to interview and if the tasks

>There is always a shortage of good jobs. If their hiring process involves jumping through hoops before being granted permission to interview and if the tasks assigned to you bear almost no relationship to the job at hand, the chances of the job actually being good are low. Employers that do this kind of thing typically have an entitlement complex and not the smartest. People with an entitlement complex who are not very clever are bad to work for. >Why would you assume someone else knows anything about your accomplishment and credentials and trusts the skills you list on your resume before you've demonstrated anything? In my case because I have a bunch of open source available that they can just read. If a company expects me to complete a 1 hour badly thought through exercise that is at best barely related to the job before they grant me permission to talk to them, just exactly how well do you think they'll treat me once I'm actually hired?

dahart 9y ago
I'd love to hear examples of how to do it right, without taking all my time. I'm genuinely interested in how to hire people without wasting their time or mine. I'd love to screen people with a day of pair programming or a 2 week paid internship, or whatever other good ideas are floating around. I can't. You have just dismissed most tech companies. All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process. If you don't want to work for one of those companies, that's absolutely your choice, but you'd be wrong to say they have an entitlement complex or aren't the smartest. > In my case because I have a bunch of open source available that they can just read. I do read people's OS projects, but I simply can't do that for every candidate before I screen them, I don't have enough time. If the coding tests are easy, and you want me to see your open source project, then just ace the coding test and move on. If you don't want the job, then don't do the coding test. It is your choice.
- bitL 9y ago
  > All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process. They are considered the best and give above average compensation. Is your company considered the best, properly paying top talent, to employ the same schema? Those tests were done to distill the top end performers with the accepted risk of huge number of false negatives. Now every mom-and-dad shop is trying to use it. That's why I call it insanity, getting extreme practices into mainstream in our industry.
  - dahart 9y ago
    > Is your company considered the best, properly paying top talent, to employ the same schema? Yes, this was true of every job I've ever had. Maybe I've been lucky. I don't really understand why asking someone to do a small amount of programming for a programming job interview, when they claim to be an experienced programmer, is any sort of "extreme" practice. You've expressed a lot of complaints about coding quizzes, some that many people here share, and some that I agree with. I would urge you to spend your energy making a specific alternative proposal that companies can actually use. The OP's proposal isn't something companies can actually use for all candidates, even if they could use it for him. I'm very interested in how to better screen and interview devs. I want to improve my process. But no process I've ever been exposed to is even close to perfect. Make sure your proposal considers the company's perspective. The ideal process will benefit both the candidate and the company, but something that's pleasant for the candidate and unpleasant for the company will never get adopted no matter how good it sounds.
    - bitL 9y ago
      Because if you have in your CV verifiable statements that you worked on some super tough engineering challenges, including advanced snippets of code/projects on GitHub demonstrating your dominance in that area, doing silly low-end coding quizzes seems like a total waste of time. Can't you really see that? It's literally like if I asked you if you ever ran a company and if you could handle preparing a budget, despite knowing you are a serial entrepreneur that sold multiple companies already. It's just super arrogant.
      - dahart 9y ago
        > Because if you have in your CV verifiable statements that you worked on some super tough engineering challenges If it takes longer to verify than it does to test your coding ability directly, why shouldn't I just ask you to do some coding? The challenges you took might be less impressive or well known than you think. The challenges you took might not say much about you if they were team challenges. > including advanced snippets of code/projects on GitHub demonstrating your dominance in that area That doesn't help me compare one candidate to another at all. Nor does your github demonstrate dominance in anything, unless your project is React or something like that. Github is a vast wasteland of barely used code. > doing silly low-end coding quizzes seems like a total waste of time It's going to take about as long to get through job interviews no matter how the interview is conducted. You can spend it programming, or you can spend it talking. The time spent is an investment in getting the job. If you don't actually want the job, then you're right, it's a waste of your time. What's not going to happen, ever, is someone will take the initiative to read through all your work, verify the things on your CV, and offer you a great high paying job without going through the interview process. > Can't you really see that? To be very frank and honest, given all the reasoning and experience I've shared with you, this question gives me the impression that you might be very inexperienced. > It's just super arrogant. What, precisely, is arrogant? What are you talking about specifically? Using Hackerrank in an interview? Having an interview at all? Not noticing that you're a rockstar before talking to you? Please take some time to articulate what the right interview process is, rather than spend any more time passing blanket judgements.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  In the past I've given programming tasks that mimic real life work as closely as possible and fit them into a reasonable time frame - for example, 1 hour of pairing/programming during an arranged face to face interview. If the test is well designed, touches on a number of areas and self contained, I think this was sufficient for me to assess their skills. "Mimic real life" means no puzzles (unless I've literally experienced them in real life), no binary tree reversals and no big O notation questions. >You have just dismissed most tech companies. All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process. I think that type of thinking leads to embarrassments like this: https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 I think he experienced exactly the same problem the OP is talking about and in this case it's not him who was dumb, it was Google. I wouldn't rule out any of those companies but I think I'd rule out joining through the standard interview process - I'd look for specific people who looked to be doing exciting work on specific teams and try to befriend them. >you'd be wrong to say they have an entitlement complex or aren't the smartest. I think it would depend upon the team. I think they're not all geniuses, and they do have a tendency to drink their own kool aid. For sure some teams are great though.
  - bitL 9y ago
    Getting to Google is more difficult than getting to Harvard. They built their process that way risking rejecting great candidates in order to minimize false positives, bad hires, according to their definition of bad hire. So the Homebrew author could have expected it, it happens all the time. I object to using the same criteria throughout the industry on most jobs these days though, instead of only on top-end ones. I have nothing against top companies having top interviews, they are usually fun if you are good.
    - crdoconnor 9y ago
      Explain to me the justification behind using an interview process that deliberately placed no emphasis on realism. This guy wouldn't be using binary trees at Google. He hasn't used them before. They are of minimal relevance in his area of expertise.

dahart 9y ago

I'd love to hear examples of how to do it right, without taking all my time. I'm genuinely interested in how to hire people without wasting their time or mine. I'd love to screen people with a day of pair programming or a 2 week paid internship, or whatever other good ideas are floating around. I can't. You have just dismissed most tech companies. All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process. If you don't want to work for one of those companies, that's absolutely your choice, but you'd be wrong to say they have an entitlement complex or aren't the smartest. > In my case because I have a bunch of open source available that they can just read. I do read people's OS projects, but I simply can't do that for every candidate before I screen them, I don't have enough time. If the coding tests are easy, and you want me to see your open source project, then just ace the coding test and move on. If you don't want the job, then don't do the coding test. It is your choice.

bitL 9y ago
> All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process. They are considered the best and give above average compensation. Is your company considered the best, properly paying top talent, to employ the same schema? Those tests were done to distill the top end performers with the accepted risk of huge number of false negatives. Now every mom-and-dad shop is trying to use it. That's why I call it insanity, getting extreme practices into mainstream in our industry.
- dahart 9y ago
  > Is your company considered the best, properly paying top talent, to employ the same schema? Yes, this was true of every job I've ever had. Maybe I've been lucky. I don't really understand why asking someone to do a small amount of programming for a programming job interview, when they claim to be an experienced programmer, is any sort of "extreme" practice. You've expressed a lot of complaints about coding quizzes, some that many people here share, and some that I agree with. I would urge you to spend your energy making a specific alternative proposal that companies can actually use. The OP's proposal isn't something companies can actually use for all candidates, even if they could use it for him. I'm very interested in how to better screen and interview devs. I want to improve my process. But no process I've ever been exposed to is even close to perfect. Make sure your proposal considers the company's perspective. The ideal process will benefit both the candidate and the company, but something that's pleasant for the candidate and unpleasant for the company will never get adopted no matter how good it sounds.
  - bitL 9y ago
    Because if you have in your CV verifiable statements that you worked on some super tough engineering challenges, including advanced snippets of code/projects on GitHub demonstrating your dominance in that area, doing silly low-end coding quizzes seems like a total waste of time. Can't you really see that? It's literally like if I asked you if you ever ran a company and if you could handle preparing a budget, despite knowing you are a serial entrepreneur that sold multiple companies already. It's just super arrogant.
    - dahart 9y ago
      > Because if you have in your CV verifiable statements that you worked on some super tough engineering challenges If it takes longer to verify than it does to test your coding ability directly, why shouldn't I just ask you to do some coding? The challenges you took might be less impressive or well known than you think. The challenges you took might not say much about you if they were team challenges. > including advanced snippets of code/projects on GitHub demonstrating your dominance in that area That doesn't help me compare one candidate to another at all. Nor does your github demonstrate dominance in anything, unless your project is React or something like that. Github is a vast wasteland of barely used code. > doing silly low-end coding quizzes seems like a total waste of time It's going to take about as long to get through job interviews no matter how the interview is conducted. You can spend it programming, or you can spend it talking. The time spent is an investment in getting the job. If you don't actually want the job, then you're right, it's a waste of your time. What's not going to happen, ever, is someone will take the initiative to read through all your work, verify the things on your CV, and offer you a great high paying job without going through the interview process. > Can't you really see that? To be very frank and honest, given all the reasoning and experience I've shared with you, this question gives me the impression that you might be very inexperienced. > It's just super arrogant. What, precisely, is arrogant? What are you talking about specifically? Using Hackerrank in an interview? Having an interview at all? Not noticing that you're a rockstar before talking to you? Please take some time to articulate what the right interview process is, rather than spend any more time passing blanket judgements.
crdoconnor 9y ago
In the past I've given programming tasks that mimic real life work as closely as possible and fit them into a reasonable time frame - for example, 1 hour of pairing/programming during an arranged face to face interview. If the test is well designed, touches on a number of areas and self contained, I think this was sufficient for me to assess their skills. "Mimic real life" means no puzzles (unless I've literally experienced them in real life), no binary tree reversals and no big O notation questions. >You have just dismissed most tech companies. All the large ones (Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) give coding puzzles as part of their interview process. I think that type of thinking leads to embarrassments like this: https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 I think he experienced exactly the same problem the OP is talking about and in this case it's not him who was dumb, it was Google. I wouldn't rule out any of those companies but I think I'd rule out joining through the standard interview process - I'd look for specific people who looked to be doing exciting work on specific teams and try to befriend them. >you'd be wrong to say they have an entitlement complex or aren't the smartest. I think it would depend upon the team. I think they're not all geniuses, and they do have a tendency to drink their own kool aid. For sure some teams are great though.
- bitL 9y ago
  Getting to Google is more difficult than getting to Harvard. They built their process that way risking rejecting great candidates in order to minimize false positives, bad hires, according to their definition of bad hire. So the Homebrew author could have expected it, it happens all the time. I object to using the same criteria throughout the industry on most jobs these days though, instead of only on top-end ones. I have nothing against top companies having top interviews, they are usually fun if you are good.
  - crdoconnor 9y ago
    Explain to me the justification behind using an interview process that deliberately placed no emphasis on realism. This guy wouldn't be using binary trees at Google. He hasn't used them before. They are of minimal relevance in his area of expertise.