3 ms·

I saw a line once, "hire for attitude, train for skill." I think this is dead on. There are people on HN who have picked up coding in 6 months because they were

I saw a line once, "hire for attitude, train for skill." I think this is dead on. There are people on HN who have picked up coding in 6 months because they were really committed and really wanted to learn. I think the ideal candidate will have broad interests and experience, be passionate about achieving excellence/mastery in their interests, and show some aptitude at logical thinking. Ask them what they like to do. If they can talk intelligently about half a dozen hobbies and show that they've achieved excellence (or at least intently pursued it) in those fields, then they'll probably be able (and willing) to do the same thing with programming. If they like to watch TV and play video games to the exclusion of all creative output, then they probably are of no use to you. Ask for references. Talk to the references and ask about what the candidate has done to impress them. If the reference says they're a good kid and will do well, that's not much use. If the reference says they once single-handedly cooked a meal for 150 people in one day, then it probably doesn't matter that they don't know anything about coding yet. They obviously know how to dedicate themselves to a task. Disclaimer: I have never been in a position to hire anyone.

stcredzero 16y ago
Basically, there's a spectrum people fit into. On one end, are those who follow instructions to cover their ass. They fulfill the letter of your instructions in such a way as to make a good case that they were obedient and they tried. On the other end are those who are goal-oriented. They interpret your instructions as a kind of goal, and they fit that goal into the general aims of the organization they are a part of. Give people small tasks, but with only general goals and leeway for initiative. See what they do. The goal-oriented people will get things accomplished. They may not be exactly the things you pictured, but if they are smart, you will find the result useful from some perspective. Hire those people, especially if they already share your perspective. The problem with references, is often you don't know what end of the spectrum the referrer is on. Maybe they value lackeys that fulfill the letter of the request. Smart goal-oriented people who see things your way are much better to delegate to, IMO.

stcredzero 16y ago

Basically, there's a spectrum people fit into. On one end, are those who follow instructions to cover their ass. They fulfill the letter of your instructions in such a way as to make a good case that they were obedient and they tried. On the other end are those who are goal-oriented. They interpret your instructions as a kind of goal, and they fit that goal into the general aims of the organization they are a part of. Give people small tasks, but with only general goals and leeway for initiative. See what they do. The goal-oriented people will get things accomplished. They may not be exactly the things you pictured, but if they are smart, you will find the result useful from some perspective. Hire those people, especially if they already share your perspective. The problem with references, is often you don't know what end of the spectrum the referrer is on. Maybe they value lackeys that fulfill the letter of the request. Smart goal-oriented people who see things your way are much better to delegate to, IMO.