8 ms·

Then the other option is to do a small take home test. Are you ok with that?

by Arzh 8y ago

psyc 8y ago
Yes. I strongly prefer an offline test, if it realistically wouldn't take more than a few hours.
- Arzh 8y ago
  Yeah we try to have a limit of 4 hours for this kinda thing. We understand that it is the interviewee's free time but when you need to screen 12 people for a job it is not worth a Senior Engineers time for a small startup.
  - toss1 8y ago
    WHAT?!? Getting the right team is one of, if not THE key to startup success. Yet you consider it not worth a senior engineer's time to evaluate the candidates for the next hire, and the presumably with whom they will need to work - productively? Check your org's runway and be sure to have your resume ready when it gets close to the end. I wouldn't expect take-off.
    - Arzh 8y ago
      Sorry I assumed that the word 'screen' was universal. This is the first step, it is a waste of a senior engineers time with a candidate that is not even close to ready for the job.
      - toss1 8y ago
        Yes, I suppose 'screen' is a bit ambiguous. Doesn't seem like a pool of a dozen is the first step. I'd want the Sr Devs involved at least out past the final half-dozen if not dozen -- not for 4 hours each, but at least a chat about what they've done, problem-solving approaches, etc. I wish you luck
Clubber 8y ago
The other, other option is just refuse to do either. I get all my work from friends I've worked with in the last 20 or so years. I mean if a company insists on these hiring practices, and they continue to get bad applications because of it, the probably aren't going to be around for long anyway.
- Arzh 8y ago
  Ok so you are out of the running for this, this is obviously for testing people you have never met before.
irq11 8y ago
The other option is to check references, do credential checks, and simple bullshit screens during interviews, like every other professional interview. Literally every other profession has this challenge! Programmers are unique only in their seeming inability to realize that they are not unique. Accountants are not asked to solve double-entry accounting whiteboard problems. Finance professionals are not given take-home banking projects. Only programmers seem to be unable to be reasonable interviewers.
- psyc 8y ago
  Yes. I told the interviewer he could call any of my past managers, knowing they would take the call, and knowing they’d give a glowing report. He laughed!
  - preordained 8y ago
    Well...fuck that guy. There is really no better measure, assuming you have the basic social skills to see through a con job/scam. I mean yah, you could always be tricked into calling someone's buddy or something, but with any depth or tactful questions that is rarely going to fool anyone.
- anthuswilliams 8y ago
  This is not to take away from your point, since I agree with you, but both accountants and finance professionals have stringent licensing requirements which (in theory) could provide a baseline expectation of competence.
  - Arzh 8y ago
    That is the reason they get away with not testing them, because they have a universal test they can look to. Software jobs are pretty fluid, so unless we have a massive standard test that cover anything from embedded c to FE with react, it seems that kind of test is out of reach for software people.
    - 8y ago
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Then the other option is to do a small take home test. Are you ok with that?

by Arzh 8y ago

Then the other option is to do a small take home test. Are you ok with that?

psyc 8y ago

Yes. I strongly prefer an offline test, if it realistically wouldn't take more than a few hours.

Arzh 8y ago
Yeah we try to have a limit of 4 hours for this kinda thing. We understand that it is the interviewee's free time but when you need to screen 12 people for a job it is not worth a Senior Engineers time for a small startup.
- toss1 8y ago
  WHAT?!? Getting the right team is one of, if not THE key to startup success. Yet you consider it not worth a senior engineer's time to evaluate the candidates for the next hire, and the presumably with whom they will need to work - productively? Check your org's runway and be sure to have your resume ready when it gets close to the end. I wouldn't expect take-off.
  - Arzh 8y ago
    Sorry I assumed that the word 'screen' was universal. This is the first step, it is a waste of a senior engineers time with a candidate that is not even close to ready for the job.
    - toss1 8y ago
      Yes, I suppose 'screen' is a bit ambiguous. Doesn't seem like a pool of a dozen is the first step. I'd want the Sr Devs involved at least out past the final half-dozen if not dozen -- not for 4 hours each, but at least a chat about what they've done, problem-solving approaches, etc. I wish you luck

Clubber 8y ago

The other, other option is just refuse to do either. I get all my work from friends I've worked with in the last 20 or so years. I mean if a company insists on these hiring practices, and they continue to get bad applications because of it, the probably aren't going to be around for long anyway.

Arzh 8y ago
Ok so you are out of the running for this, this is obviously for testing people you have never met before.

irq11 8y ago

The other option is to check references, do credential checks, and simple bullshit screens during interviews, like every other professional interview. Literally every other profession has this challenge! Programmers are unique only in their seeming inability to realize that they are not unique. Accountants are not asked to solve double-entry accounting whiteboard problems. Finance professionals are not given take-home banking projects. Only programmers seem to be unable to be reasonable interviewers.

psyc 8y ago
Yes. I told the interviewer he could call any of my past managers, knowing they would take the call, and knowing they’d give a glowing report. He laughed!
- preordained 8y ago
  Well...fuck that guy. There is really no better measure, assuming you have the basic social skills to see through a con job/scam. I mean yah, you could always be tricked into calling someone's buddy or something, but with any depth or tactful questions that is rarely going to fool anyone.
anthuswilliams 8y ago
This is not to take away from your point, since I agree with you, but both accountants and finance professionals have stringent licensing requirements which (in theory) could provide a baseline expectation of competence.
- Arzh 8y ago
  That is the reason they get away with not testing them, because they have a universal test they can look to. Software jobs are pretty fluid, so unless we have a massive standard test that cover anything from embedded c to FE with react, it seems that kind of test is out of reach for software people.
  - 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]