5 ms·

Something else that should be mentioned Don't send technical pre-screens to candidates before you talk to them. You're not Google. I'm not going to waste my ti

Something else that should be mentioned Don't send technical pre-screens to candidates before you talk to them. You're not Google. I'm not going to waste my time on something before I know anything about the company, the team, or the job itself. I haven't really seen this interviewing for jobs on the west coast, but there's a lot of shops in Chicago (fintech) that seem to be under the impression that anyone applying for an engineering job is desperate.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Aperocky 7y ago
tbh, there’s a disconnect. Large number of recent grads are flooding the application channels. Half of them have skill level that probably shouldn’t be accepted anywhere. At the same time established veterans are highly sought after and never really needed to ‘apply’. As a result a massive proportion of application pipeline is filled with noise. And most of them are somewhat desperate for a job. Giving the illusion that qualified people are also desperate.
- shados 7y ago
  That's the key. It's very much two bubbles. Because some parts of the job is almost factory like, anyone with a bit of practice can do it, and the other part is extremely difficult, requires ton of experience, might need a computer science degree or more, etc. Both groups barely understand the other. One is like "Lol I can write my email address on toilet paper and have a 500k/year job by Monday!", the other is "Ive applied at 150 companies and 149 of them didn't even reply back, the last 1 did to tell me there was a typo in my resume!". But both groups have the same title (plus or minus seniority levels), work on the same projects in the same teams and follow the same career track. I wonder how long until software engineering becomes more like other fields. The nurse, the general practitioner and the brain surgeon are not applying at the same job or even have the same backgrounds. The hvac technician and the engineer aren't either. Maybe the person who builds forms and the person who engineers a distributed system being on the same career track is the wrong model. It sets the wrong expectations. It can stunt career growth.
  - Aperocky 7y ago
    > Some part of the job is almost factory like This sound like poor design at work. Nobody should be writing CRUD all day, it should be as easy as a new entry in a yaml/json file. It is all software engineering but the difference in output can be enormous.
    - jorblumesea 7y ago
      I mean, sure, at a place with the engineering level or skill of the FAANGs. But at many places, developer effort is very manual and automation isn't considered.
      - crdoconnor 7y ago
        If you're a developer who doesn't consider automation or improved tooling to solve repetitive tasks you're probably not a very good developer.
        jorblumesea 7y ago
        Welcome to 95% of the engineering world haha. Code monkeys.
        shados 7y ago
        Neither are you if you're generalizing or engineering around repetitive tasks without considering the total cost of ownership of going either way.
    - shados 7y ago
      The "form" here is a metaphor for "simple things". If i have a large system and I have 3 forms, I'm not going to add (or worse, build) a dynamic form generator system. Worse, the forms could be completely different or all have very special ways of working that can't easily be generalized. At that point its a lot easier to build them by hand. However, you don't need someone with a degree in software engineering to do that. Repeat that for any other "simple but easier to do one off than to engineer around" programming tasks. Not to different from factory automation. A lot of stuff done by hand COULD be done by robots. Its just cheaper to do it by hand.
- unlinked_dll 7y ago
  I think if your channel is noisy you should check the input. If you're flooded by inexperienced or new grads for the role, the question isn't how to screen candidates but how to reduce the number of applications. For instance, don't put an ad out on Angel List or LinkedIn and take form applications with only a vague job description. Retain a recruiter and don't work with people on contingency. This happened to me last week, and it wasn't a blind application. It was a recruiter who came to me about a job. I told them I wasn't interested in doing a technical screen for a job and company I knew nothing about, and in the past few months I've been soliciting interviews, not a single company I talked to tried that without a quick 15 minute phone call to see if everyone agreed that would be a good next step. It saves time and money for everyone.
mcfunk 7y ago
Some companies use this kind of screen more as a way to filter out people who aren't adequately interested in the company/job to put in the effort on the testing -- so perhaps in some cases it is working as designed.
- unlinked_dll 7y ago
  well there's the rub. How am I supposed to be "adequately" interested in the company/job if I don't know anything about the company or the job? That's what I mean by talking to a candidate before the screen. Going through a recruiter isn't sufficient for most of the information I would like before deciding to apply for the job.
- crdoconnor 7y ago
  that's a good way to filter for enthusiastic juniors. it's not such a great way to select for experience.
- wbronitsky 7y ago
  In this argument, it would seem that to be "adequately interested" in a company, I need to be willing to do unpaid labor for them as a first step. I would argue that most, if not all companies, should disabuse themselves of the thought that this is anything but exploitation.
Spoom 7y ago
FWIW in both my interview loops at Google, I've had a call with the recruiter before any kind of tech screen. I think that's standard practice. May vary when considering interns / new grads, I'm not sure.
- unlinked_dll 7y ago
  Same here, but it's my understanding that they don't strictly hire for specific roles/teams and take a large number of unsolicited applications. The tech screen is also interactive with an engineer which is much better than automated assignments with a time limit.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Aperocky 7y ago

tbh, there’s a disconnect. Large number of recent grads are flooding the application channels. Half of them have skill level that probably shouldn’t be accepted anywhere. At the same time established veterans are highly sought after and never really needed to ‘apply’. As a result a massive proportion of application pipeline is filled with noise. And most of them are somewhat desperate for a job. Giving the illusion that qualified people are also desperate.

shados 7y ago
That's the key. It's very much two bubbles. Because some parts of the job is almost factory like, anyone with a bit of practice can do it, and the other part is extremely difficult, requires ton of experience, might need a computer science degree or more, etc. Both groups barely understand the other. One is like "Lol I can write my email address on toilet paper and have a 500k/year job by Monday!", the other is "Ive applied at 150 companies and 149 of them didn't even reply back, the last 1 did to tell me there was a typo in my resume!". But both groups have the same title (plus or minus seniority levels), work on the same projects in the same teams and follow the same career track. I wonder how long until software engineering becomes more like other fields. The nurse, the general practitioner and the brain surgeon are not applying at the same job or even have the same backgrounds. The hvac technician and the engineer aren't either. Maybe the person who builds forms and the person who engineers a distributed system being on the same career track is the wrong model. It sets the wrong expectations. It can stunt career growth.
- Aperocky 7y ago
  > Some part of the job is almost factory like This sound like poor design at work. Nobody should be writing CRUD all day, it should be as easy as a new entry in a yaml/json file. It is all software engineering but the difference in output can be enormous.
  - jorblumesea 7y ago
    I mean, sure, at a place with the engineering level or skill of the FAANGs. But at many places, developer effort is very manual and automation isn't considered.
    - crdoconnor 7y ago
      If you're a developer who doesn't consider automation or improved tooling to solve repetitive tasks you're probably not a very good developer.
      - jorblumesea 7y ago
        Welcome to 95% of the engineering world haha. Code monkeys.
      - shados 7y ago
        Neither are you if you're generalizing or engineering around repetitive tasks without considering the total cost of ownership of going either way.
  - shados 7y ago
    The "form" here is a metaphor for "simple things". If i have a large system and I have 3 forms, I'm not going to add (or worse, build) a dynamic form generator system. Worse, the forms could be completely different or all have very special ways of working that can't easily be generalized. At that point its a lot easier to build them by hand. However, you don't need someone with a degree in software engineering to do that. Repeat that for any other "simple but easier to do one off than to engineer around" programming tasks. Not to different from factory automation. A lot of stuff done by hand COULD be done by robots. Its just cheaper to do it by hand.
unlinked_dll 7y ago
I think if your channel is noisy you should check the input. If you're flooded by inexperienced or new grads for the role, the question isn't how to screen candidates but how to reduce the number of applications. For instance, don't put an ad out on Angel List or LinkedIn and take form applications with only a vague job description. Retain a recruiter and don't work with people on contingency. This happened to me last week, and it wasn't a blind application. It was a recruiter who came to me about a job. I told them I wasn't interested in doing a technical screen for a job and company I knew nothing about, and in the past few months I've been soliciting interviews, not a single company I talked to tried that without a quick 15 minute phone call to see if everyone agreed that would be a good next step. It saves time and money for everyone.

mcfunk 7y ago

Some companies use this kind of screen more as a way to filter out people who aren't adequately interested in the company/job to put in the effort on the testing -- so perhaps in some cases it is working as designed.

unlinked_dll 7y ago
well there's the rub. How am I supposed to be "adequately" interested in the company/job if I don't know anything about the company or the job? That's what I mean by talking to a candidate before the screen. Going through a recruiter isn't sufficient for most of the information I would like before deciding to apply for the job.
crdoconnor 7y ago
that's a good way to filter for enthusiastic juniors. it's not such a great way to select for experience.
wbronitsky 7y ago
In this argument, it would seem that to be "adequately interested" in a company, I need to be willing to do unpaid labor for them as a first step. I would argue that most, if not all companies, should disabuse themselves of the thought that this is anything but exploitation.

Spoom 7y ago

FWIW in both my interview loops at Google, I've had a call with the recruiter before any kind of tech screen. I think that's standard practice. May vary when considering interns / new grads, I'm not sure.

unlinked_dll 7y ago
Same here, but it's my understanding that they don't strictly hire for specific roles/teams and take a large number of unsolicited applications. The tech screen is also interactive with an engineer which is much better than automated assignments with a time limit.