4 ms·

The exact number is irrelevant, the fact that there is a number is relevant. That means the developer not only understood the business requirements but also mea

The exact number is irrelevant, the fact that there is a number is relevant. That means the developer not only understood the business requirements but also measured the impact afterwards. That's a very valuable skill in many companies that use metrics to make decisions. In fact it doesn't even matter if the number was utter BS and unscientific in measurement. So are probably 80% of metrics in companies that are metrics driven. But the manager running the team still needs a metric to meet their goals and this developer shows that they can deliver that.

bromuro 6y ago
Or it is just a random number to show I have measured something because a website told me so. Why bother with numbers?
- marcinzm 6y ago
  Because until it becomes abused to worthlessness it gives you a leg up on those who aren't doing so. That's the cycle of most things involving hiring.
mcenedella 6y ago
OP here. I think this is exactly right "The exact number is irrelevant, the fact that there is a number is relevant. That means the developer not only understood the business requirements but also measured the impact afterwards." In follow-up interviews, the interviewer may dig into those results, and in reference checks, may try to confirm your achievements, so I do not think it's accurate to say it would be OK to use BS numbers. But the overall sense that numbers are important, and send an important signal about a developer's work habits, patterns and practices, is true.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  A number can be corroborated by multiple people and have a logical chain to its creation and still be utter BS. Even scientific papers with their standards have massive issues with reproducibility. Look at the HN comments pointing out measurement methodology flaws when some corporate blog claims X% improvement. My point was more towards those engineers who are sticklers for accuracy and truth. It doesn't matter in this case. Mass delusion is fine as long as enough people believe it and there's a thin veneer of logic around it.
- wolco2 6y ago
  That's not really the type of information offered during a reference check. Did x employees actions on this project result in a 27% increase in engagement? A lot of places only give yes this person worked here between those two dates. The person giving the reference would be in no position to answer in many cases. Legally a company doesn't want to get sued because they told another company the person didn't hit 27% when they might be able to prove they did.

bromuro 6y ago

Or it is just a random number to show I have measured something because a website told me so. Why bother with numbers?

marcinzm 6y ago
Because until it becomes abused to worthlessness it gives you a leg up on those who aren't doing so. That's the cycle of most things involving hiring.

mcenedella 6y ago

OP here. I think this is exactly right "The exact number is irrelevant, the fact that there is a number is relevant. That means the developer not only understood the business requirements but also measured the impact afterwards." In follow-up interviews, the interviewer may dig into those results, and in reference checks, may try to confirm your achievements, so I do not think it's accurate to say it would be OK to use BS numbers. But the overall sense that numbers are important, and send an important signal about a developer's work habits, patterns and practices, is true.

marcinzm 6y ago
A number can be corroborated by multiple people and have a logical chain to its creation and still be utter BS. Even scientific papers with their standards have massive issues with reproducibility. Look at the HN comments pointing out measurement methodology flaws when some corporate blog claims X% improvement. My point was more towards those engineers who are sticklers for accuracy and truth. It doesn't matter in this case. Mass delusion is fine as long as enough people believe it and there's a thin veneer of logic around it.
wolco2 6y ago
That's not really the type of information offered during a reference check. Did x employees actions on this project result in a 27% increase in engagement? A lot of places only give yes this person worked here between those two dates. The person giving the reference would be in no position to answer in many cases. Legally a company doesn't want to get sued because they told another company the person didn't hit 27% when they might be able to prove they did.