5 ms·

I've had the most success doing a remote, one-hour pair programming exercise via screen sharing with the candidate. They're allowed to look at docs, do any goo

by tdfx 7y ago

I've had the most success doing a remote, one-hour pair programming exercise via screen sharing with the candidate. They're allowed to look at docs, do any google searches, and I don't penalize them if they don't finish. I'm more interested in the process and the way they navigate their environment to solve problems. I continually coach them to speak aloud whatever they're thinking, especially if stuck on something. My last hire was someone who didn't finish the exercise, but I really liked their approach to solving the problem. It's the closest thing to "what would it be like to work with this person" that I've found. This has been super effective for me after many years of making bad hires through "technical interviews" and take home assignments.

PopeDotNinja 7y ago
I encourage you to drop the whole "see how they think" process. You can't read minds, and it's not possible to see how they think. I don't like complaining without a suggestion, so... consider letting a candidate code on their own, and then ask them to walk you through what they did. You won't be disturbing the process by staring at them, and you'll get to see a bit about how they work independently & articulate what they've done. Unless you're a pairing shop, that's really what you're looking for anyway, yes?
- blowski 7y ago
  There is no “one true way” for hiring people. It depends on the position you’re hiring for, the team, the office environment (if there is one), the project, the budget, and so many other things. The right hiring process for one position may be completely wrong for another. And that’s OK.
- mjfisher 7y ago
  I have a strong dislike for the 'see how they think' or 'code like you would in production' style instructions for take-homes - they're not specific enough. I don't think that necessarily applies to real-time pairing exercises though. The interviewer has significant latitude to interactively question and prompt to get at the skills and values a candidate possesses.

by tdfx 7y ago

PopeDotNinja 7y ago

I encourage you to drop the whole "see how they think" process. You can't read minds, and it's not possible to see how they think. I don't like complaining without a suggestion, so... consider letting a candidate code on their own, and then ask them to walk you through what they did. You won't be disturbing the process by staring at them, and you'll get to see a bit about how they work independently & articulate what they've done. Unless you're a pairing shop, that's really what you're looking for anyway, yes?

blowski 7y ago
There is no “one true way” for hiring people. It depends on the position you’re hiring for, the team, the office environment (if there is one), the project, the budget, and so many other things. The right hiring process for one position may be completely wrong for another. And that’s OK.
mjfisher 7y ago
I have a strong dislike for the 'see how they think' or 'code like you would in production' style instructions for take-homes - they're not specific enough. I don't think that necessarily applies to real-time pairing exercises though. The interviewer has significant latitude to interactively question and prompt to get at the skills and values a candidate possesses.