5 ms·

Here we go again perpetuating the stereotype of the whiney privileged engineer put in a position of mild discomfort by the villainous abusive white board interv

by crsv 6y ago

Here we go again perpetuating the stereotype of the whiney privileged engineer put in a position of mild discomfort by the villainous abusive white board interview boogeyman. I don’t mind whiteboard interview exercises. They’re not great, but they often give a very good and reasonable signal that often has a high corollary to work performance. I think there’s bigger fish to fry in refining fair and objective interview processes, I’ll never understand the perpetual moaning around this aspect of technical interviews.

simonhamp 6y ago
> they often give a very good and reasonable signal that often has a high corollary to work performance Do you have any statistically significant data to back this claim?
- madamelic 6y ago
  There is statistical data saying the opposite: http://chrisparnin.me/pdf/stress_FSE_20.pdf http://chrisparnin.me/pdf/stress_FSE_20.pdf That whiteboard interviews are actually testing how you perform under stress rather than how good you are at your job. Additionally, in my opinion, it measures how good the interviewer is. If you get a bad interviewer or even just one in a bad mood, just pack your bags because you aren't getting it. Whiteboards are incredibly arbitrary in my opinion, if taken alone. If it is part of a complete assessment, ehhhh.
  - virtuous_signal 6y ago
    >There is statistical data saying the opposite Interesting study and really good discussion on HN at the time, but the opposite of "[Whiteboard interviews] often give a very good and reasonable signal that often has a high corollary to work performance" would be something like "People who do well at whiteboard interviews tend to be worse performers at work." I don't think that's what the study said at all; rather that people do worse at whiteboard problems when they're being watched vs. not being watched.
    - WesternStar 6y ago
      Also people act as though software is a job without anxiety. There is plenty of anxiety in this job. Sometimes under pressure you really do have to perform or push back and its good to know if people can do it.
      - asdff 6y ago
        It doesn't have to be stressful. Whether or not you have a gun to your head is due to management. Deadlines are an abstract concept created by humans and can always be moved. The best companies keep them very elastic.
      - _qulr 6y ago
        > Also people act as though software is a job without anxiety. Not. All. Anxiety. Is. The. Same. Ask a firefighter to give a speech in front of 1000 people. This is an entirely different kind of anxiety than running into a burning building. Ironically, it may be the former rather than the latter that makes the firefighter sweat. Writing code is generally not a performance art. We're not stage performers. Interviews are an unusual situation that aren't anything like our daily jobs. Stress on the job is not the same as interview stress. Work emergencies are not the same as interviews. We need to take into account human psychology. These factors are all well known, but the tech industry seems to act in deliberate ignorance of humanity.
        madamelic 6y ago
        Also stress on the job isn't the same as stress getting a job. One you are getting paid no matter what, the other you aren't and are 'performing' in the hopes of getting paid.
      - zerr 6y ago
        The interview anxiety is a very specific type of anxiety - if it occurs during the day job - stay away from such company.
  - spideymans 6y ago
    Most noteworthy for me: All of the women failed the whiteboard tests, however they passed tests conducted in a private setting. Assuming the study’s results are valid, that’s really all the justification we need to get rid of these tests.
yelloweyes 6y ago
Are you an engineer? If you are, then do you realize how dumb you are by not sticking up for your own profession? Do you think FAANG pays engineers 200k because they're oh so nice companies? Or is it because talented people are hard to find?
- pb7 6y ago
  What if I like the current interview format?
- mars4rp 6y ago
  Yeah if a poor nerd makes some decent money, they need to abuse him with stupid whiteboard questions. But no one is questioning the money CEO, executives,managers, lawyers, etc are getting.
hejja 6y ago
100%. if properly trained, interviewers ask questions that build without throwing the kitchen sink at you. whiteboard interviews (when done holistically) assess for signal, not binary correctness - do you have a solid framework to build a solution? - are you considering multiple approaches / data structures / complexities - referencing similar problems, vocabulary, situations to illustrate breadth of knowledge sure, the stress component isn't ideal, but there are multiple relevant capabilities being assessed in a very short amount of time... in other words it's a much better test of tacit knowledge than alternatives
- fogetti 6y ago
  You can confirm the same using a take-home assignment and a code review together with the candidate. Or even with an on-site pair programming. Neither of those require whiteboards.
  - hejja 6y ago
    pair programming, for sure if done right, whiteboarding should be almost the same as pair programming -- an iterative dialogue
C1sc0cat 6y ago
I think its writing exact code down instead of good enough pseudo code - that people hate. WB interviews should be about problem solving not regurgitation of rote learned algorithms
- estomagordo 6y ago
  I strongly believe there is some signal to shoving enough familiarity with at least one language to come up with mostly correct syntax. I won't ever fault a candidate for failing to close a paren or being unsure of whether the size of a container is .length() or .size(), but if virtually every line a candidate writes is of questionable value, I'd say that means something.

by crsv 6y ago

simonhamp 6y ago

> they often give a very good and reasonable signal that often has a high corollary to work performance Do you have any statistically significant data to back this claim?

madamelic 6y ago
There is statistical data saying the opposite: http://chrisparnin.me/pdf/stress_FSE_20.pdf http://chrisparnin.me/pdf/stress_FSE_20.pdf That whiteboard interviews are actually testing how you perform under stress rather than how good you are at your job. Additionally, in my opinion, it measures how good the interviewer is. If you get a bad interviewer or even just one in a bad mood, just pack your bags because you aren't getting it. Whiteboards are incredibly arbitrary in my opinion, if taken alone. If it is part of a complete assessment, ehhhh.
- virtuous_signal 6y ago
  >There is statistical data saying the opposite Interesting study and really good discussion on HN at the time, but the opposite of "[Whiteboard interviews] often give a very good and reasonable signal that often has a high corollary to work performance" would be something like "People who do well at whiteboard interviews tend to be worse performers at work." I don't think that's what the study said at all; rather that people do worse at whiteboard problems when they're being watched vs. not being watched.
  - WesternStar 6y ago
    Also people act as though software is a job without anxiety. There is plenty of anxiety in this job. Sometimes under pressure you really do have to perform or push back and its good to know if people can do it.
    - asdff 6y ago
      It doesn't have to be stressful. Whether or not you have a gun to your head is due to management. Deadlines are an abstract concept created by humans and can always be moved. The best companies keep them very elastic.
    - _qulr 6y ago
      > Also people act as though software is a job without anxiety. Not. All. Anxiety. Is. The. Same. Ask a firefighter to give a speech in front of 1000 people. This is an entirely different kind of anxiety than running into a burning building. Ironically, it may be the former rather than the latter that makes the firefighter sweat. Writing code is generally not a performance art. We're not stage performers. Interviews are an unusual situation that aren't anything like our daily jobs. Stress on the job is not the same as interview stress. Work emergencies are not the same as interviews. We need to take into account human psychology. These factors are all well known, but the tech industry seems to act in deliberate ignorance of humanity.
      - madamelic 6y ago
        Also stress on the job isn't the same as stress getting a job. One you are getting paid no matter what, the other you aren't and are 'performing' in the hopes of getting paid.
    - zerr 6y ago
      The interview anxiety is a very specific type of anxiety - if it occurs during the day job - stay away from such company.
- spideymans 6y ago
  Most noteworthy for me: All of the women failed the whiteboard tests, however they passed tests conducted in a private setting. Assuming the study’s results are valid, that’s really all the justification we need to get rid of these tests.

yelloweyes 6y ago

Are you an engineer? If you are, then do you realize how dumb you are by not sticking up for your own profession? Do you think FAANG pays engineers 200k because they're oh so nice companies? Or is it because talented people are hard to find?

pb7 6y ago
What if I like the current interview format?
mars4rp 6y ago
Yeah if a poor nerd makes some decent money, they need to abuse him with stupid whiteboard questions. But no one is questioning the money CEO, executives,managers, lawyers, etc are getting.

hejja 6y ago

100%. if properly trained, interviewers ask questions that build without throwing the kitchen sink at you. whiteboard interviews (when done holistically) assess for signal, not binary correctness - do you have a solid framework to build a solution? - are you considering multiple approaches / data structures / complexities - referencing similar problems, vocabulary, situations to illustrate breadth of knowledge sure, the stress component isn't ideal, but there are multiple relevant capabilities being assessed in a very short amount of time... in other words it's a much better test of tacit knowledge than alternatives

fogetti 6y ago
You can confirm the same using a take-home assignment and a code review together with the candidate. Or even with an on-site pair programming. Neither of those require whiteboards.
- hejja 6y ago
  pair programming, for sure if done right, whiteboarding should be almost the same as pair programming -- an iterative dialogue

C1sc0cat 6y ago

I think its writing exact code down instead of good enough pseudo code - that people hate. WB interviews should be about problem solving not regurgitation of rote learned algorithms

estomagordo 6y ago
I strongly believe there is some signal to shoving enough familiarity with at least one language to come up with mostly correct syntax. I won't ever fault a candidate for failing to close a paren or being unsure of whether the size of a container is .length() or .size(), but if virtually every line a candidate writes is of questionable value, I'd say that means something.