3 ms·
I like Basecamp's approach of not having live coding in the interview. They discuss past projects and you walk through some code you're proud of or think is int
by tizz98 7y ago
I like Basecamp's approach of not having live coding in the interview. They discuss past projects and you walk through some code you're proud of or think is interesting.
1. https://m.signalvnoise.com/hiring-a-programmer-ditch-the-coding-interview-and-get-back-to-basics/ https://m.signalvnoise.com/hiring-a-programmer-ditch-the-cod...
2. "... you’ll submit some code you’re proud of, review it, and tell its story. Then on to an interview. Our interviews are one hour, all remote, with your future colleagues, on your schedule. We’ll talk through some of your code and some of ours. No gotchas, brainteasers, or whiteboard coding." from https://apply.workable.com/basecamp/j/F2CB808F33/ https://apply.workable.com/basecamp/j/F2CB808F33/
edit: spacing
- Analemma_ 7y agoThis seems decent, except for the “submit some code you’re proud of“ part. What about applicants whose only jobs have been on proprietary code they can’t share? This is the same problem as using GitHub resumés: it’s kind of unfairly biased against people who either don’t work on open source projects, or like to have a life outside of coding when they’re not on the job.
- _throwawayyyyyy 7y agoThat sounds like a good case for paying someone to do a project for you (if they're employed, give them an 'hours' budget over a longer 'days' or 'weeks' period). Then you'd have something to look at that they just built, fresh.
- esyir 7y agoUntil you run into the guy who literally cannot code. I'm not talking hard algorithms either.
- mixmastamyk 7y agoThen you fire them.
- _throwawayyyyyy 7y agoThis - California is an at-will employment state. Given that, you'd think hiring and firing would both be quicker. Literally any reason that isn't illegal. So why are there so many barriers to being hired if I can be fired at whim?
- mixmastamyk 7y agoCurrently cargo-cult fashion.