3 ms·

Shouldn't candidates have portfolios -- i.e., examples of software that they have built, with a complete git history, etc? That seems to me to do away with the

Shouldn't candidates have portfolios -- i.e., examples of software that they have built, with a complete git history, etc? That seems to me to do away with the need for a coding challenge as well as demonstrating a lot about their approach and interests. On the whole, I'm surprised by the number of people who think both coding challenges and whiteboard interviews are a waste of everyone's time. Is the employer not supposed to assess the candidate in any respect?

Viliam1234 5y ago
> Shouldn't candidates have portfolios -- i.e., examples of software that they have built, with a complete git history, etc? Would you be okay if your former employees provided the software they built for you, with a complete git history, at their next job interviews? If no, do you have a reason to assume that the former employers of your current job candidates would be okay with the same thing?
Jemaclus 5y ago
> Shouldn't candidates have portfolios -- i.e., examples of software that they have built, with a complete git history, etc? Most career engineers (including myself) have worked on proprietary systems. I can't show you any production-level code that I've written in the last 10 years, because it's all proprietary and owned by the companies I've worked for. I don't even have access to my previous employers' code! So what exactly would I put in my "portfolio"? If the answer is "open-source," then that presumes that the only engineers worth hiring are those who contribute to open-source -- which leaves out a ton of great engineers -- and those who have the extra time to contribute to open-source outside of their day jobs -- which can be a bias against those with life obligations (e.g., caring for dependents). So the answer to your first question is: no, they shouldn't. If you have one, FANTASTIC. But it shouldn't be a requirement. To your second question... Employers need to evaluate candidates _somehow_, so yeah, I'm baffled by that as well.

Viliam1234 5y ago

> Shouldn't candidates have portfolios -- i.e., examples of software that they have built, with a complete git history, etc? Would you be okay if your former employees provided the software they built for you, with a complete git history, at their next job interviews? If no, do you have a reason to assume that the former employers of your current job candidates would be okay with the same thing?

Jemaclus 5y ago

> Shouldn't candidates have portfolios -- i.e., examples of software that they have built, with a complete git history, etc? Most career engineers (including myself) have worked on proprietary systems. I can't show you any production-level code that I've written in the last 10 years, because it's all proprietary and owned by the companies I've worked for. I don't even have access to my previous employers' code! So what exactly would I put in my "portfolio"? If the answer is "open-source," then that presumes that the only engineers worth hiring are those who contribute to open-source -- which leaves out a ton of great engineers -- and those who have the extra time to contribute to open-source outside of their day jobs -- which can be a bias against those with life obligations (e.g., caring for dependents). So the answer to your first question is: no, they shouldn't. If you have one, FANTASTIC. But it shouldn't be a requirement. To your second question... Employers need to evaluate candidates _somehow_, so yeah, I'm baffled by that as well.