4 ms·

There's a major issue with your method. The best developers know they can get jobs wherever they want. What incentive do they have to bother with the extra work

There's a major issue with your method. The best developers know they can get jobs wherever they want. What incentive do they have to bother with the extra work?

cageface 16y ago
When I see application processes like this I'm generally more interested because it signals to me that the company cares about hiring and that I'm more likely to have colleagues there that have been selected for ability rather than having exactly the right checkboxes on their CVs.
ajg1977 16y ago
Because, a) the 'best developers tend to love beating challenges so see it as a fun exercise to do one evening, and b) good developers want to work with good developers and seeing the screening process is a benefit. Good developers of a certain experience level generally realize that if they apply for a job somewhere and waltz through the interview, or worse, the interview is a basically a pleasant chat with the tech director, then the chances are the hiring standards really aren't that great . Oh and c) - if a developer does feel they're too good for your screening test, or such a thing is enough to put them off your company, then weeding them out at such an early stage may actually be a positive thing. I do think it's crass to send out a problem sheet without at least verbally talking to the candidate briefly though. We currently do - 5-15 minute chat with a recruiter or PM who is savvy enough to filter out the people who really aren't experienced enough. 3 hour timed problem (debugging, coding, math, domain knowledge) Technical phone screen In-person interview (6-7 hours, all expenses paid).
- bugsy 16y ago
  What you say is true for mediocre to average developers. Before I had my own company, every place I worked whenever I would talk to clients or go to conferences I would get on the spot job offers. Principals would ask "Would you ever consider leaving XYZ?" I would say I'm not looking at the moment. They would always then hand me their cards and say "If you're ever looking to move, give me a call first." In addition, I would get calls at home to my unlisted number because of articles I had written or patents I held. When it was time to move on I would have dozens of open offers already to chose from. Why the hell would I or any other great developer bother dredging through monster hoping to find the 0.001% of ads that are both legitimate and for a place than isn't some web shop with slave hours and low wages? Answer is I wouldn't. Any company that only relies on job ads and resumes is not a place that great developers work for.
- jchonphoenix 16y ago
  Sure, but keep in mind people have busy schedules. Recently a startup I was somewhat interested in required a 4-5 hour coding project that was similar to the labs I do in school. I'm already bogged down in work interviewing, doing normal classes, writing a senior thesis, and preparing my research for publication. I decided to forget about the company and look elsewhere, for I already had offers from great places like Google and Facebook and could always fall back. I'm not saying its bad to screen candidates with interesting puzzles. I'm saying that you risk filtering out the better candidates that just don't have time to deal with puzzles from a company they don't know. Additionally, keep in mind that I come from a competitive university in the academic world (although I figure competition is pretty bad at most universities). Thus, with my current 100 hour work weeks, I would just rather not bother with solving tedious puzzles.
jamn 16y ago
I second this. I just graduated and as I was looking for a job and I interviewed for a bunch of companies. One of them asked that I solve some programming challenges. Sure, I like puzzles and I like being challenged. However, at the time I was already being challenged by my thesis work, problem sets, interviews... it's hard to agree to make a huge time commitment just to get the right to a first round interview. Since other hot startups/ cool companies (Google, FB) don't require this type of activity, it makes sense to me to think that a lot of people simply won't have the time to apply because they're busy solving more interesting puzzles.
- ig1 16y ago
  Facebook are well known for their application puzzles, http://www.facebook.com/careers/puzzles.php http://www.facebook.com/careers/puzzles.php And Google are notorious for having a long drawn out interviewing process.
  - jchonphoenix 16y ago
    Facebook's interview puzzles aren't a prerequisite requirement to getting a job. The good developers who don't have time will just interview and get offers. Google's are drawn out, but each interview takes 1 hour max so there is an upper bound on your time.
praptak 16y ago
I'd be glad to do the extra work (well yeah, within some limits, I won't code you a website for free :) ) The benefit to me as a developer is that this reduces the probability I'll work with incompetent people.
jchonphoenix 16y ago
One major argument I'm hearing is that by giving these coding projects, competent developers should be more interested because this guarantees the people they work with will be competent. My response is that you can find out the competence of an individual without wasting 5 hours of their time on a pre-interview puzzles. If they pass your phone screen and interview, you should be fairly confident that they are a competent programmer. I'm hard pressed to believe that someone who passes famously difficult interviews (for example Palantir) would find the puzzle anything more than busy work.
- torial 16y ago
  At my previous job (which I enjoyed greatly until the president embezzled funds and ran off with a woman), I asked to do a programming task so that I could prove my skill and ability to do what they needed.

There's a major issue with your method. The best developers know they can get jobs wherever they want. What incentive do they have to bother with the extra work?

cageface 16y ago

When I see application processes like this I'm generally more interested because it signals to me that the company cares about hiring and that I'm more likely to have colleagues there that have been selected for ability rather than having exactly the right checkboxes on their CVs.

ajg1977 16y ago

Because, a) the 'best developers tend to love beating challenges so see it as a fun exercise to do one evening, and b) good developers want to work with good developers and seeing the screening process is a benefit. Good developers of a certain experience level generally realize that if they apply for a job somewhere and waltz through the interview, or worse, the interview is a basically a pleasant chat with the tech director, then the chances are the hiring standards really aren't that great . Oh and c) - if a developer does feel they're too good for your screening test, or such a thing is enough to put them off your company, then weeding them out at such an early stage may actually be a positive thing. I do think it's crass to send out a problem sheet without at least verbally talking to the candidate briefly though. We currently do - 5-15 minute chat with a recruiter or PM who is savvy enough to filter out the people who really aren't experienced enough. 3 hour timed problem (debugging, coding, math, domain knowledge) Technical phone screen In-person interview (6-7 hours, all expenses paid).

bugsy 16y ago
What you say is true for mediocre to average developers. Before I had my own company, every place I worked whenever I would talk to clients or go to conferences I would get on the spot job offers. Principals would ask "Would you ever consider leaving XYZ?" I would say I'm not looking at the moment. They would always then hand me their cards and say "If you're ever looking to move, give me a call first." In addition, I would get calls at home to my unlisted number because of articles I had written or patents I held. When it was time to move on I would have dozens of open offers already to chose from. Why the hell would I or any other great developer bother dredging through monster hoping to find the 0.001% of ads that are both legitimate and for a place than isn't some web shop with slave hours and low wages? Answer is I wouldn't. Any company that only relies on job ads and resumes is not a place that great developers work for.
jchonphoenix 16y ago
Sure, but keep in mind people have busy schedules. Recently a startup I was somewhat interested in required a 4-5 hour coding project that was similar to the labs I do in school. I'm already bogged down in work interviewing, doing normal classes, writing a senior thesis, and preparing my research for publication. I decided to forget about the company and look elsewhere, for I already had offers from great places like Google and Facebook and could always fall back. I'm not saying its bad to screen candidates with interesting puzzles. I'm saying that you risk filtering out the better candidates that just don't have time to deal with puzzles from a company they don't know. Additionally, keep in mind that I come from a competitive university in the academic world (although I figure competition is pretty bad at most universities). Thus, with my current 100 hour work weeks, I would just rather not bother with solving tedious puzzles.

jamn 16y ago

I second this. I just graduated and as I was looking for a job and I interviewed for a bunch of companies. One of them asked that I solve some programming challenges. Sure, I like puzzles and I like being challenged. However, at the time I was already being challenged by my thesis work, problem sets, interviews... it's hard to agree to make a huge time commitment just to get the right to a first round interview. Since other hot startups/ cool companies (Google, FB) don't require this type of activity, it makes sense to me to think that a lot of people simply won't have the time to apply because they're busy solving more interesting puzzles.

ig1 16y ago
Facebook are well known for their application puzzles, http://www.facebook.com/careers/puzzles.php http://www.facebook.com/careers/puzzles.php And Google are notorious for having a long drawn out interviewing process.
- jchonphoenix 16y ago
  Facebook's interview puzzles aren't a prerequisite requirement to getting a job. The good developers who don't have time will just interview and get offers. Google's are drawn out, but each interview takes 1 hour max so there is an upper bound on your time.

praptak 16y ago

I'd be glad to do the extra work (well yeah, within some limits, I won't code you a website for free :) ) The benefit to me as a developer is that this reduces the probability I'll work with incompetent people.

jchonphoenix 16y ago

One major argument I'm hearing is that by giving these coding projects, competent developers should be more interested because this guarantees the people they work with will be competent. My response is that you can find out the competence of an individual without wasting 5 hours of their time on a pre-interview puzzles. If they pass your phone screen and interview, you should be fairly confident that they are a competent programmer. I'm hard pressed to believe that someone who passes famously difficult interviews (for example Palantir) would find the puzzle anything more than busy work.

torial 16y ago
At my previous job (which I enjoyed greatly until the president embezzled funds and ran off with a woman), I asked to do a programming task so that I could prove my skill and ability to do what they needed.