3 ms·

We talk a big game about merit, capability, qualifications and such. Ultimately though, nearly all actual selection processes are are subjective or ilegible...

We talk a big game about merit, capability, qualifications and such. Ultimately though, nearly all actual selection processes are are subjective or ilegible... depending on how you see these things. How an interviewer feels about you intuitively matters a lot, maybe the most. Actual tests of skill are usually intuitive as well. An interviewer tries to gauge your skills, but it's rarely designed to be an objective test of skill. If it is an objective test of skill, it's rarely the primary decision driver. Blind auditions enforce a certain kind of objectivity. But, I think we can read into the fact that musicians "audition" while employees "interview." You perform an audition. Blind auditions would be a radical change to hiring/selection. The big advantages/disadvantages of the approach are like those of standardised testing. They measure the easily measurable, and bury everything else.

commandlinefan 6y ago
> an objective test of skill Other industries/careers have exactly this: a professional licensing exam. Most programmers vehemently oppose any sort of standardized testing.
- jdrek1 6y ago
  I'm curious, what do you want to test? The classic "memorize how to bubblesort" interview questions which so many people complain about because they don't show anything except that someone has prepared? Isn't it better to just look over the code of applicants and check if they are aware of general structures etc? Obviously some familiarity with algorithms etc is required and it should be checked if that's there, but with tests you can't really test if someone understands the bigger picture and did not just memorize the answer. I know more than enough people who can solve problems just fine but their code is absolutely atrocious and I'd never hire them. Interviews where one can ask them why they write code the way they do are probably far more effective.

commandlinefan 6y ago

> an objective test of skill Other industries/careers have exactly this: a professional licensing exam. Most programmers vehemently oppose any sort of standardized testing.

jdrek1 6y ago
I'm curious, what do you want to test? The classic "memorize how to bubblesort" interview questions which so many people complain about because they don't show anything except that someone has prepared? Isn't it better to just look over the code of applicants and check if they are aware of general structures etc? Obviously some familiarity with algorithms etc is required and it should be checked if that's there, but with tests you can't really test if someone understands the bigger picture and did not just memorize the answer. I know more than enough people who can solve problems just fine but their code is absolutely atrocious and I'd never hire them. Interviews where one can ask them why they write code the way they do are probably far more effective.