3 ms·

This is a great idea. What about a service that allows proctored skills tests for applicants? Like Sitepoint but with some additional verification layers. Hiri

This is a great idea. What about a service that allows proctored skills tests for applicants? Like Sitepoint but with some additional verification layers. Hiring managers would then pick a tech stack or set of skills they need, and matches would bubble up based on applicants in the area with the relevant skills. The "culture fit" question could be another egg to crack. Who knows if interviews are the best way to figure that out...

hysan 7y ago
Any process that attempts to “solve” the technical skills verification problem will not work unless it replaces the technical portion of the on-site interview. Otherwise, companies can still reject based on technical assessments in which case you’ve solved nothing. You’ve simply changed the shape of the hiring funnel. Also, looking beyond the immediate need, companies would also need to understand that this only applies to very specific positions. You shouldn’t apply this to entry level, nor should you apply this to positions where the employee is expected to adapt quickly to changing tech stacks. What this leaves you with is contracting. You hire experts with a very specific skillset that you need that is verified by an agency. For everything else, there is still not a good generic solution.
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  You’ve simply changed the shape of the hiring funnel. Sometimes, that's enough to make a real difference. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule
- hinkley 7y ago
  You know what's super weird? My company selects for people who can pass white board interviews. Which are not only terrible in their own right but also not the way anybody I know codes. And despite that, most of the people I work with are actually below average at explaining things with drawings or whiteboards. And since that average in our industry is already "pretty awful" that's saying something. So not only are we looking for the wrong thing, but we haven't even proven our own people can do the thing we thought we were looking at. I'm starting to think a lottery system would be better. We know we have algorithms that do better with random sampling. Maybe hiring is one of them.
aheilbut 7y ago
like college?
PeterStuer 7y ago
Sounds like you are hiring faceless nameless cogs in a machine.
- mschuster91 7y ago
  Most coding and other jobs these days are cogs in the machine. The amount of jobs where one can have individual impact is next to negligible.
  - PeterStuer 7y ago
    Depends on which side of the industry you are I guess. In bespoke software most of the work is either customer facing or at the very least would require team skills, even for 'coders'.
goatinaboat 7y ago
What about a service that allows proctored skills tests for applicants? You mean like... a university?
- nefitty 7y ago
  Do universities provide employers with the results of skills tests on things like Git?

hysan 7y ago

Any process that attempts to “solve” the technical skills verification problem will not work unless it replaces the technical portion of the on-site interview. Otherwise, companies can still reject based on technical assessments in which case you’ve solved nothing. You’ve simply changed the shape of the hiring funnel. Also, looking beyond the immediate need, companies would also need to understand that this only applies to very specific positions. You shouldn’t apply this to entry level, nor should you apply this to positions where the employee is expected to adapt quickly to changing tech stacks. What this leaves you with is contracting. You hire experts with a very specific skillset that you need that is verified by an agency. For everything else, there is still not a good generic solution.

DoreenMichele 7y ago
You’ve simply changed the shape of the hiring funnel. Sometimes, that's enough to make a real difference. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule
hinkley 7y ago
You know what's super weird? My company selects for people who can pass white board interviews. Which are not only terrible in their own right but also not the way anybody I know codes. And despite that, most of the people I work with are actually below average at explaining things with drawings or whiteboards. And since that average in our industry is already "pretty awful" that's saying something. So not only are we looking for the wrong thing, but we haven't even proven our own people can do the thing we thought we were looking at. I'm starting to think a lottery system would be better. We know we have algorithms that do better with random sampling. Maybe hiring is one of them.

aheilbut 7y ago

like college?

PeterStuer 7y ago

Sounds like you are hiring faceless nameless cogs in a machine.

mschuster91 7y ago
Most coding and other jobs these days are cogs in the machine. The amount of jobs where one can have individual impact is next to negligible.
- PeterStuer 7y ago
  Depends on which side of the industry you are I guess. In bespoke software most of the work is either customer facing or at the very least would require team skills, even for 'coders'.

goatinaboat 7y ago

What about a service that allows proctored skills tests for applicants? You mean like... a university?

nefitty 7y ago
Do universities provide employers with the results of skills tests on things like Git?