3 ms·

TFA is about the company assigning randomized pseudonyms to candidates.

• sokoloff 8y ago
  I understand. Whether the candidate, a researcher, or my in-house recruiter mangles the name, the end effect is the same.
  • cimmanom 8y ago
    Why? I can get being pissed if someone's misrepresenting their identity (or annoyed if they're representing it inconsistently) as a job seeker. But AFAICT this is about letting the candidate's performance be mentally/emotionally isolated from all the baggage that comes along with their history. It doesn't even preclude screening people out based on history before this anonymized interview. You can then put it back together with the other information you have about them once you've formed an opinion of their technical abilities without preconceptions about them.
    • sokoloff 8y ago
      I guess my perspective is shaped by the fact that I'm likely hiring very senior folks, where I'm going to look through my network to see if I know anyone who knows them. For that purpose, doing the evaluation "semi-blind" and then later putting the real name/profile back on to do network and reference checks is even OK. (Even in that case, the real hiring decision is subject to skew by knowing the full details of the candidate, and often the resume/work history alone is uniquely identifying.) I agree that it's 100% fair that we should be evaluating software engineers on software engineering abilities not names (and not even colleges to be honest).