3 ms·

42 years old. I've been in the industry 20 years now. Does that make me a young whippersnapper? I don't know. I can say that I refuse interviews that don't incl

42 years old. I've been in the industry 20 years now. Does that make me a young whippersnapper? I don't know. I can say that I refuse interviews that don't include job-relevant questions. If I'm asked to do work as proof of experience, I refuse any requests that aren't job-relevant. After this many years in the industry, if someone can't take the time to look at my publicly available body of work, call some references (which I always provide access to), then I want nothing to do with them. If your measure of someone's ability equates to fizzbuzz YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH TECH HIRING. The grads probably aren't aware enough to know the difference, being new grads. And I'd wager that's why you're targeting them.

Bedon292 5y ago
I don't see fizzbuzz here as the full measure of someone's ability. Its a filter. I have had many candidates make it through phones screens who seem quite capable only to start working through a series of problem solving questions and they cannot do it. People with job history that suggests they should easily be able to. With no specific language requirements (pseudo code is totally fine) and they can't even write a for loop. We ask to see how they approach the problem, not to get a perfect answer. Ask questions about it, talk through your reasoning, work with us on it. Not worried about off by 1 or specific syntax, just getting to know them and how they work through a problem. We tried hiring a few people who didn't perform as well on this, and it was a mistake every time. And anyone who had no problems with it was always a good hire. Now, obviously there is a problem with the screening process when people who can't actually write a for loop get through it, but until that is fixed, you have to filter them out somehow. How have you approached that in the past? I would honestly like to know how to fix it.

Bedon292 5y ago

I don't see fizzbuzz here as the full measure of someone's ability. Its a filter. I have had many candidates make it through phones screens who seem quite capable only to start working through a series of problem solving questions and they cannot do it. People with job history that suggests they should easily be able to. With no specific language requirements (pseudo code is totally fine) and they can't even write a for loop. We ask to see how they approach the problem, not to get a perfect answer. Ask questions about it, talk through your reasoning, work with us on it. Not worried about off by 1 or specific syntax, just getting to know them and how they work through a problem. We tried hiring a few people who didn't perform as well on this, and it was a mistake every time. And anyone who had no problems with it was always a good hire. Now, obviously there is a problem with the screening process when people who can't actually write a for loop get through it, but until that is fixed, you have to filter them out somehow. How have you approached that in the past? I would honestly like to know how to fix it.