7 ms·

Train before you hire

50 points by thesethings 16y ago

atgm 16y ago
It sounds like a great idea to me! You can also get a look at prospective employees and see how well they learn/deal with the unknown.
ekanes 16y ago
It's an interesting idea, but I can't help but think after reading the following that the post is just fantastically subtle PR. "Today I had an epiphany. Maybe the right thing to do is to enroll prospective job applicants in some kind of low-impact training as part of the interview process. If the training were given in a part-time, online format (like we do at CodeLesson)..."
- jeffreymcmanus 16y ago
  Subtle nothing. It's a corporate blog, champ. In what way does that make the premise invalid?
- petercooper 16y ago
  but I can't help but think after reading the following that the post is just fantastically subtle PR. That would apply to about a third of the posts that make it to the HN front page nowadays, I'd say ;-)
- thesethings 16y ago
  I hear ya, but the agenda (mostly) doesn't matter to me. I assume corporate blog posts are published for commercial reasons, even when it's about the author's personal life. And I've gotten so much value out of HN discussions that benefit the site linkee (lots of awesome threads start out "Show HN: My new site/business"). I guess my main point is: I'm all for the business linked to getting PR, as long as we, the HN members get some cool value out of it. In this case, i thought the post was very topical because talent/skill shortage is a frequently talked about issue here, as are work cultural norms in general. But I totally respect the opinion that some posts may not have an interesting enough ideas to make PR interesting. That said, I always wait for the other shoe to drop: the HN thread it spawns often ends up being incredible.
sayemm 16y ago
Regarding training/interviewing, I just think about this awesome Steve Yegge post: http://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/practicing-programming http://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/practicing-programm... "It's a bit easier to tell if someone's in great shape physically than if they're in great shape mentally. You can't just stare at their brain and hope to find a six-pack in all those folds. It's easy to tell how physically fit someone is. You can make people run laps, lift things, take their physical measurements, etc. But for determining someone's mental fitness, you pretty much have to interview them. It it's hard to do a good job of it, since it's like running backwards in front of the person, egging them to go faster. You have to be in pretty good shape yourself to be a good interviewer."
listrophy 16y ago
Standard practice at my company: interviewees pair with a developer for a week before being offered a job. Preferably, over the week, you'd switch pairs at least once or twice. If we don't hire you, we pay you as a contractor for your time. If we do hire you, we pay you either as an employee or contractor for your time (depending on what our accountant says). We'll bend the rules depending on circumstances, but basically you're not getting in unless you spend 30 hours pairing with our devs. Anything else, I propose, can be hazardous to the culture and effectiveness of your company.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- imack 16y ago
  Doesn't that limit you to potential employees who aren't currently employed? And what percentage of people do you "drop"? I imagine once you spend a week with someone you might get attached to them enough that it would be hard to let them go for something subjective unless they were a pretty big asshole.
  - listrophy 16y ago
    We're pretty young, so we haven't had too many candidates get to the interview phase... we've "dropped" one out of 5 candidates. You have to impress us to get to the point of spending a week with us. As far as the "unemployed" part goes, things aren't usually as cut-and-dried as that. Of those five, one was on the verge of being laid off, and one was a student. The other three were gainfully employed. Being open to working weekends with candidates makes this much more possible, though more lengthy. We're pretty proud of who we are. If your desire to work with us is strong enough, you'll find a way. And if you do find a way under difficult circumstances, it says volumes about your personal drive.
    - tomjen3 16y ago
      The problem with your approach is that it only works if you can communicate that you are a company worth doing a lot extra work to get hired at. The approach may work for you, but most companies seem to have the idea that they are special, when they really aren't - and frankly most people wouldn't accept your requirements unless they where truly desperate so you will likely have to change your approach as you grow.
ebiester 16y ago
IIRC, this is how AOL used to work. Everyone started in the call center. After 6 months, you could start working your way up, and many people went into QA and programming from there.
- me2i81 16y ago
  Nothing attracts top-notch engineering talent like the lure of working in the call center.
  - Kaizyn 16y ago
    I don't know. Google puts some of the most brilliant programming minds to work selling ads and I haven't heard much in the way of complaints.
  - ebiester 16y ago
    Think of it as pre-engineering raw talent. Often, people worked these jobs while going to college, or were recognized as talent while they were there and bumped first into QA. Of course, many of us instead realized we hated call centers and found part time sysadmin jobs. :)
dgouldin 16y ago
In a previous life, I was a C# dev for fat client windows apps. Without any serious web development experience, a Django shop took a chance on me, and I learned the whole stack on the job. I feel comfortable saying they were happy with my work, and I came out of the experience with a new set of skills, a new career really. All that to say, I'm a big proponent of taking the time (and yes it does take time) to find out if somebody is smart and willing to learn and leaving resumes with #yrs experience in technology X to the HR monkeys. If a skill is in demand, a latent expert is of much higher long-term value than a present one.
jim_h 16y ago
Before I was hired for my current company, I given a quick tutorial on the programming language (used in company) and had a quiz afterward. It's a great way to see how fast someone can learn and see them apply that knowledge. It was a great opportunity for me was well since it allowed me to show I had potential.

50 points by thesethings 16y ago

atgm 16y ago

It sounds like a great idea to me! You can also get a look at prospective employees and see how well they learn/deal with the unknown.

ekanes 16y ago

It's an interesting idea, but I can't help but think after reading the following that the post is just fantastically subtle PR. "Today I had an epiphany. Maybe the right thing to do is to enroll prospective job applicants in some kind of low-impact training as part of the interview process. If the training were given in a part-time, online format (like we do at CodeLesson)..."

jeffreymcmanus 16y ago
Subtle nothing. It's a corporate blog, champ. In what way does that make the premise invalid?
petercooper 16y ago
but I can't help but think after reading the following that the post is just fantastically subtle PR. That would apply to about a third of the posts that make it to the HN front page nowadays, I'd say ;-)
thesethings 16y ago
I hear ya, but the agenda (mostly) doesn't matter to me. I assume corporate blog posts are published for commercial reasons, even when it's about the author's personal life. And I've gotten so much value out of HN discussions that benefit the site linkee (lots of awesome threads start out "Show HN: My new site/business"). I guess my main point is: I'm all for the business linked to getting PR, as long as we, the HN members get some cool value out of it. In this case, i thought the post was very topical because talent/skill shortage is a frequently talked about issue here, as are work cultural norms in general. But I totally respect the opinion that some posts may not have an interesting enough ideas to make PR interesting. That said, I always wait for the other shoe to drop: the HN thread it spawns often ends up being incredible.

sayemm 16y ago

Regarding training/interviewing, I just think about this awesome Steve Yegge post: http://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/practicing-programming http://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/practicing-programm... "It's a bit easier to tell if someone's in great shape physically than if they're in great shape mentally. You can't just stare at their brain and hope to find a six-pack in all those folds. It's easy to tell how physically fit someone is. You can make people run laps, lift things, take their physical measurements, etc. But for determining someone's mental fitness, you pretty much have to interview them. It it's hard to do a good job of it, since it's like running backwards in front of the person, egging them to go faster. You have to be in pretty good shape yourself to be a good interviewer."

listrophy 16y ago

Standard practice at my company: interviewees pair with a developer for a week before being offered a job. Preferably, over the week, you'd switch pairs at least once or twice. If we don't hire you, we pay you as a contractor for your time. If we do hire you, we pay you either as an employee or contractor for your time (depending on what our accountant says). We'll bend the rules depending on circumstances, but basically you're not getting in unless you spend 30 hours pairing with our devs. Anything else, I propose, can be hazardous to the culture and effectiveness of your company.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
imack 16y ago
Doesn't that limit you to potential employees who aren't currently employed? And what percentage of people do you "drop"? I imagine once you spend a week with someone you might get attached to them enough that it would be hard to let them go for something subjective unless they were a pretty big asshole.
- listrophy 16y ago
  We're pretty young, so we haven't had too many candidates get to the interview phase... we've "dropped" one out of 5 candidates. You have to impress us to get to the point of spending a week with us. As far as the "unemployed" part goes, things aren't usually as cut-and-dried as that. Of those five, one was on the verge of being laid off, and one was a student. The other three were gainfully employed. Being open to working weekends with candidates makes this much more possible, though more lengthy. We're pretty proud of who we are. If your desire to work with us is strong enough, you'll find a way. And if you do find a way under difficult circumstances, it says volumes about your personal drive.
  - tomjen3 16y ago
    The problem with your approach is that it only works if you can communicate that you are a company worth doing a lot extra work to get hired at. The approach may work for you, but most companies seem to have the idea that they are special, when they really aren't - and frankly most people wouldn't accept your requirements unless they where truly desperate so you will likely have to change your approach as you grow.

ebiester 16y ago

IIRC, this is how AOL used to work. Everyone started in the call center. After 6 months, you could start working your way up, and many people went into QA and programming from there.

me2i81 16y ago
Nothing attracts top-notch engineering talent like the lure of working in the call center.
- Kaizyn 16y ago
  I don't know. Google puts some of the most brilliant programming minds to work selling ads and I haven't heard much in the way of complaints.
- ebiester 16y ago
  Think of it as pre-engineering raw talent. Often, people worked these jobs while going to college, or were recognized as talent while they were there and bumped first into QA. Of course, many of us instead realized we hated call centers and found part time sysadmin jobs. :)

dgouldin 16y ago

In a previous life, I was a C# dev for fat client windows apps. Without any serious web development experience, a Django shop took a chance on me, and I learned the whole stack on the job. I feel comfortable saying they were happy with my work, and I came out of the experience with a new set of skills, a new career really. All that to say, I'm a big proponent of taking the time (and yes it does take time) to find out if somebody is smart and willing to learn and leaving resumes with #yrs experience in technology X to the HR monkeys. If a skill is in demand, a latent expert is of much higher long-term value than a present one.

jim_h 16y ago

Before I was hired for my current company, I given a quick tutorial on the programming language (used in company) and had a quiz afterward. It's a great way to see how fast someone can learn and see them apply that knowledge. It was a great opportunity for me was well since it allowed me to show I had potential.