3 ms·

> Trick questions and esoteric puzzles give the interviewer no useful information about the interviewee — her skills, her strengths, her weaknesses, her potenti

> Trick questions and esoteric puzzles give the interviewer no useful information about the interviewee — her skills, her strengths, her weaknesses, her potential for growth. Those are the things a great interviewer should be seeking out. That means you give hints when the candidate gets stuck and you don’t interrupt them with asinine comments. Whatever problem you give a candidate to solve, your goal as an interviewer should be to get them through as much of that problem as possible, to get as much signal as possible. The added benefit is that the further you get, the better and more confident the candidate feels, which also helps prepare them to do their best for the next session. Less experienced interviewees often need more help, and that’s ok. This article lays out the problem very well, but then again so to very many others which have appeared on HN over the years. Why does this keep happening? I mean this at the most fundamental level. Why waste time with programming puzzlers to begin with? Does the candidate's degree (assuming no job experience) not obviate the need for this kind of thing? Do past programming gigs not absolve them of the need to perform in a way they'll never be asked to perform on the job? Are CS departments so full of bullshitters that unless you sic your 10x devs on them to sniff out whether they can program their way out of a paper bag, your organization runs the risk of filling up with "C Players?" I mean, what's really going on here?

monocasa 5y ago
I don't think that programming puzzles are the best way to divine better information in this area. But yes, there's a ton of people looking for a programming job that both have a lot of experience on paper and can't code their way out of a wet paper bag. It seems you can have very long stretches in a large company where you do negative work. Best way I've found is to talk to them about their experience, sort of post mortem style. Pretty much everyone can talk about their experience in some respects, even those working on classified projects; you just need to respect their boundaries.
okareaman 5y ago
I used to feel like you and ask the same questions until recently when I read someone on HN saying these interviews are meant to see how a person handles stress. Then it clicked for me. I've done pretty well at interviews despite being terrible at white board exercises because my personality is such that I treat these interviews casually. It's not that important in the larger scheme of things that I get this particular job, I'm looking at the interviewers as much as they are looking at me to see if I could work with them and I'll often joke around and keep it light hearted, even when failing a white board exercise. The interviewers know the work culture and are looking for someone that can fit. In the case presented in this blog post, the writer could not handle a small joke about the Swift language. The interviewer probably knew the team like to joke around and tease, so this person was not a good fit. I think it's really that simple. I really doubt the interviewer thought the person was not technically qualified. In one case, I was in a particularly light hearted mood and I joked throughout the entire interview. I believe to this day I was hired to lighten up the mood of the team, which turned out to be a very serious and gloomy bunch.
jedberg 5y ago
> Does the candidate's degree (assuming no job experience) not obviate the need for this kind of thing? I've met people with degrees who can't program out of a wet paper bag. And also people without a degree who can program circles around anyone. It only seems to be an indicator of your ability to finish a long term project, unless it's a top school. Then it's a slightly more positive indicator. > Do past programming gigs not absolve them of the need to perform in a way they'll never be asked to perform on the job? When I was doing interviews for Netflix for Senior Engineers, I always asked FizzBuzz on the phone screen. These were all people who had at least five years of programming experience on their resume with titles like "Senior Engineer". 50% of them were unable to do the assignment in any language with unlimited time. So it appears that a resume is not sufficient either. I hate puzzlers and quizzers and never use them (other than FizzBuzz, which frankly anyone who can code should be able to do). But I don't know what exactly we can replace them with. I personally just ask the person more general questions to understand their depth of knowledge and then explain what the work will entail and ask them if they think they can handle that. Then I hire them and give them work and let them go (or let them quit on their own) if they can't handle the work.

monocasa 5y ago

I don't think that programming puzzles are the best way to divine better information in this area. But yes, there's a ton of people looking for a programming job that both have a lot of experience on paper and can't code their way out of a wet paper bag. It seems you can have very long stretches in a large company where you do negative work. Best way I've found is to talk to them about their experience, sort of post mortem style. Pretty much everyone can talk about their experience in some respects, even those working on classified projects; you just need to respect their boundaries.

okareaman 5y ago

I used to feel like you and ask the same questions until recently when I read someone on HN saying these interviews are meant to see how a person handles stress. Then it clicked for me. I've done pretty well at interviews despite being terrible at white board exercises because my personality is such that I treat these interviews casually. It's not that important in the larger scheme of things that I get this particular job, I'm looking at the interviewers as much as they are looking at me to see if I could work with them and I'll often joke around and keep it light hearted, even when failing a white board exercise. The interviewers know the work culture and are looking for someone that can fit. In the case presented in this blog post, the writer could not handle a small joke about the Swift language. The interviewer probably knew the team like to joke around and tease, so this person was not a good fit. I think it's really that simple. I really doubt the interviewer thought the person was not technically qualified. In one case, I was in a particularly light hearted mood and I joked throughout the entire interview. I believe to this day I was hired to lighten up the mood of the team, which turned out to be a very serious and gloomy bunch.

jedberg 5y ago

> Does the candidate's degree (assuming no job experience) not obviate the need for this kind of thing? I've met people with degrees who can't program out of a wet paper bag. And also people without a degree who can program circles around anyone. It only seems to be an indicator of your ability to finish a long term project, unless it's a top school. Then it's a slightly more positive indicator. > Do past programming gigs not absolve them of the need to perform in a way they'll never be asked to perform on the job? When I was doing interviews for Netflix for Senior Engineers, I always asked FizzBuzz on the phone screen. These were all people who had at least five years of programming experience on their resume with titles like "Senior Engineer". 50% of them were unable to do the assignment in any language with unlimited time. So it appears that a resume is not sufficient either. I hate puzzlers and quizzers and never use them (other than FizzBuzz, which frankly anyone who can code should be able to do). But I don't know what exactly we can replace them with. I personally just ask the person more general questions to understand their depth of knowledge and then explain what the work will entail and ask them if they think they can handle that. Then I hire them and give them work and let them go (or let them quit on their own) if they can't handle the work.