3 ms·
I've been getting hit up by companies lately, and it's been a little bit of a put-off for me when they say things like that. Not because I think it's something
by jarin 15y ago
I've been getting hit up by companies lately, and it's been a little bit of a put-off for me when they say things like that. Not because I think it's something bad for a company to want, but because I suffer from Impostor Syndrome sometimes, especially during interviews with recently-funded startups (despite the fact that people I have worked with tell me I am a very good coder).
It probably has something to do with the fact that on paper I know I look like a terrible candidate (not only am I not a Stanford graduate, I'm a high school dropout).
The problem is there isn't really a good way to quickly pre-screen candidates other than by looking at their credentials. Experience counts, but education seems to be more heavily-weighted in startups. You can pretty reliably tell if a candidate is good or not by going through their Github account, but it might be asking a lot to expect hiring managers to go through all of them.
- aerique 15y agoSounds like a business opportunity!
- mgkimsal 15y ago"You can pretty reliably tell if a candidate is good or not by going through their Github account, but it might be asking a lot to expect hiring managers to go through all of them." Well, a hiring manager's job is to find strong (best?) candidates to fulfill the company's needs. I suspect for development positions reviewing public code (github, sf, etc) when possible is going to yield better results than looking at what, if any, university someone went to. "Well, not everyone has the ability to contribute to public projects!". Boo hoo - not everyone can afford to go to fancy universities either. Why is that a better criteria than reviewing the work of people who've made their work available for review? Because filtering based on university and stated experience is easier on the hiring manager? You're optimizing for the wrong results then.