4 ms·
True that interviewing is a resource hog and the post nicely articulates the problem. But I don't think it really counts as a technical debt, if it were you wo
by krosaen 16y ago
True that interviewing is a resource hog and the post nicely articulates the problem. But I don't think it really counts as a technical debt, if it were you would gain something from it in the short run. For example, by not testing your code you have a short term gain (faster deployment), but accrue long term debt (slower development time as the % of new code vs existing functionality becomes smaller).
- jerf 16y agoI'm also going to argue against the word "technical" here; taking time out to interview isn't affecting your code, it's affecting all the uses of your time and just happening to catch the code as a particular subset. It's not a technical debt or anything fancy, it's just a plain old-fashioned unproductive use of time, one of those things startups can't afford because their biggest disadvantage against larger entities almost by definition is a surfeit of (wo)manhours.
- SoftwareMaven 16y agoI think the point was that you accrue "hiring debt" as you stop reading details in the resume so you can get through them faster (the benefit), then stop being as detailed in the screens, again so you can get through them faster. Each step, you are increasing the debt, because it moves on to the development team to pay that debt by taking more time out for interviews. Of course, in this case, all the benefit goes to the manager and all the pain goes to the developers.
- davidkatz 16y agoExactly
- krosaen 16y agoI can see that... but kicking the can down the road is would be an obviously bad form of debt, like a payday loan or something... Technical debt is a term that to me is more interesting when you might have a payoff as described in Eric Ries article: http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/07/embrace-technical-debt.html http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/07/embrace-technic...