6 ms·

> And a few angry senior engineers out there saying "Why do I have to keep writing fizzbuzz? Its like I have to prove over and over again that I can program at

> And a few angry senior engineers out there saying "Why do I have to keep writing fizzbuzz? Its like I have to prove over and over again that I can program at all!". You didn't address this part of the problem. This friction is one of the reasons the job market is so distorted.

distantaidenn 7y ago
This is the issue I have faced, and probably why I am leaving this whole mess behind. I still love engineering, but it's time to move to a mentor/consulting role. I've been in this game for over 10 years, and just can't be arsed to do any more testing. I once had someone ask me what a "cookie" was... Storytime: I used to work at a huge Japanese multinational (you can probably guess which one), and I rose through the ranks pretty quickly. After two years (which given their turnaround, made me pretty ancient), I left the firm for greener pastures. A few years later, they started a new sub-division, and a personal contact recommended me. It was a decent pay bump, and despite the negative press, I didn't mind working there, during my tenure. I figured I'd be a shoo-in. It was for a non-technical role (PM), but they wanted someone with a tech background, which I had. They then wanted to give me an online engineering test just as a formality. It was a quick test, and I solved it with little issue. Fast forward 2 weeks and I get a rejection email, saying that my code wasn't up to snuff, and they'd be moving on. It took everything in me to not write back saying, "Hey, go to your main service and log-in. Ok yeah, so the interface and client backend to your SSO and the user management services that millions of your users interact with each day -- I wrote all of that. Oh yeah, your absurdly complicated coupon system -- I wrote a lot if not all of that too."
- knightofmars 7y ago
  "It took everything in me to not write back saying..." Sometimes it is worth writing back. Because people often don't realize there are flaws in the process they are using. Either they will ignore the feedback and it's business as usual or they will take it and work towards improving the system.
- ryandrake 7y ago
  Another observation: I don't think there is a single company I've successfully working at in the past, where I could pass their interview process today (including my current company). Companies are being extraordinarily picky now, and the interview bar just keeps going up and up. Companies keep complaining that they can't find talent, while their interviewers are asking candidates to implement red-black trees on a whiteboard in 5 minutes.
josephg 7y ago
Oh sorry I wasn't clear. The reason is that successfully completing a simple programming exercise puts you in the top 15% or so of resumes that get sent in for most programming roles. When you apply for a company, they have to assume you aren't very good, because most people who apply aren't very good. (Because people with strong skills get snapped up, and people with weak skills spam their resume everywhere they can.). Figuring out who's worth spending time interviewing is a hard problem in itself. And there's no silver bullet here - people lie about their work experience all the time. There are so many user accounts on github with copies or forks of random people's code, with basically no changes. I suspect they exist support lies on resumes. I don't think it distorts the market, but it is annoying. A recruiter I talked to a few years ago said she thinks its crazy we don't use an agency model for programmers like actors do. The idea there is that good programmers pay a small percentage of their salary to a manager, who's job is to find you the best roles that suit your skills and negotiate pay on your behalf and so on. She tried to set up a business doing just that but she couldn't get enough clients to make it work. Good programmers balked at the idea of paying a few % of our salary to someone in an ongoing way, to look after our career. Having to prove your skills in each and every interview, and form those social connections on your own? Thats a choice we make.
- pdimitar 7y ago
  > (Because people with strong skills get snapped up, and people with weak skills spam their resume everywhere they can.) It's extremely saddening how prevalent this prejudice is. But what if I am still looking for work and companies literally don't reply to my applying to them? I might be the next John Carmack but if nobody gives me a chance (for reasons outside of my control and unrelated to my proficiency) then according to you I suck. :( It's very broken to assume that skilled people get snapped up immediately so whoever is available must be mediocre (or bad). It is an awfully imprecise assumption!
  - hinkley 7y ago
    Or what if I’m being picky? I made a mistake of expediency in accepting my current job, and it’s not the first time. Several people I trust have been trying to talk me into applying to more places and turning them down if I don’t see what I’m looking for on their end. But they tend to overbook and one of the first things to go is your opportunity to ask questions. Which is, really, as good a way to learn about someone as most of the techniques we try. You only have ten or fifteen minutes to ask the company questions. What did you hunk was worthwhile to expend that time on?

distantaidenn 7y ago

This is the issue I have faced, and probably why I am leaving this whole mess behind. I still love engineering, but it's time to move to a mentor/consulting role. I've been in this game for over 10 years, and just can't be arsed to do any more testing. I once had someone ask me what a "cookie" was... Storytime: I used to work at a huge Japanese multinational (you can probably guess which one), and I rose through the ranks pretty quickly. After two years (which given their turnaround, made me pretty ancient), I left the firm for greener pastures. A few years later, they started a new sub-division, and a personal contact recommended me. It was a decent pay bump, and despite the negative press, I didn't mind working there, during my tenure. I figured I'd be a shoo-in. It was for a non-technical role (PM), but they wanted someone with a tech background, which I had. They then wanted to give me an online engineering test just as a formality. It was a quick test, and I solved it with little issue. Fast forward 2 weeks and I get a rejection email, saying that my code wasn't up to snuff, and they'd be moving on. It took everything in me to not write back saying, "Hey, go to your main service and log-in. Ok yeah, so the interface and client backend to your SSO and the user management services that millions of your users interact with each day -- I wrote all of that. Oh yeah, your absurdly complicated coupon system -- I wrote a lot if not all of that too."

knightofmars 7y ago
"It took everything in me to not write back saying..." Sometimes it is worth writing back. Because people often don't realize there are flaws in the process they are using. Either they will ignore the feedback and it's business as usual or they will take it and work towards improving the system.
ryandrake 7y ago
Another observation: I don't think there is a single company I've successfully working at in the past, where I could pass their interview process today (including my current company). Companies are being extraordinarily picky now, and the interview bar just keeps going up and up. Companies keep complaining that they can't find talent, while their interviewers are asking candidates to implement red-black trees on a whiteboard in 5 minutes.

josephg 7y ago

Oh sorry I wasn't clear. The reason is that successfully completing a simple programming exercise puts you in the top 15% or so of resumes that get sent in for most programming roles. When you apply for a company, they have to assume you aren't very good, because most people who apply aren't very good. (Because people with strong skills get snapped up, and people with weak skills spam their resume everywhere they can.). Figuring out who's worth spending time interviewing is a hard problem in itself. And there's no silver bullet here - people lie about their work experience all the time. There are so many user accounts on github with copies or forks of random people's code, with basically no changes. I suspect they exist support lies on resumes. I don't think it distorts the market, but it is annoying. A recruiter I talked to a few years ago said she thinks its crazy we don't use an agency model for programmers like actors do. The idea there is that good programmers pay a small percentage of their salary to a manager, who's job is to find you the best roles that suit your skills and negotiate pay on your behalf and so on. She tried to set up a business doing just that but she couldn't get enough clients to make it work. Good programmers balked at the idea of paying a few % of our salary to someone in an ongoing way, to look after our career. Having to prove your skills in each and every interview, and form those social connections on your own? Thats a choice we make.

pdimitar 7y ago
> (Because people with strong skills get snapped up, and people with weak skills spam their resume everywhere they can.) It's extremely saddening how prevalent this prejudice is. But what if I am still looking for work and companies literally don't reply to my applying to them? I might be the next John Carmack but if nobody gives me a chance (for reasons outside of my control and unrelated to my proficiency) then according to you I suck. :( It's very broken to assume that skilled people get snapped up immediately so whoever is available must be mediocre (or bad). It is an awfully imprecise assumption!
- hinkley 7y ago
  Or what if I’m being picky? I made a mistake of expediency in accepting my current job, and it’s not the first time. Several people I trust have been trying to talk me into applying to more places and turning them down if I don’t see what I’m looking for on their end. But they tend to overbook and one of the first things to go is your opportunity to ask questions. Which is, really, as good a way to learn about someone as most of the techniques we try. You only have ten or fifteen minutes to ask the company questions. What did you hunk was worthwhile to expend that time on?