3 ms·
Obligatory question here: how are you tuning how you screen for bad apples in your technical interview pre-hire to make sure that over time you have less and le
by yowlingcat 5y ago
Obligatory question here: how are you tuning how you screen for bad apples in your technical interview pre-hire to make sure that over time you have less and less bad apples? Also, what level of scale is your remote eng organization operating at?
Having also had a lot of experience managing remote teams (and to be a little bit hyperbolic for the sake of making a point), saying that remote work attracts "bad apples" at a much higher rate than in-person work seems like a cop out to excuse poor screening hygiene.
- sokoloff 5y agoI think the applicant pool has a higher concentration of <any given negative> than the employee pool. I posit that people with negative factors tend to apply/interview more per job start and probably have shorter average tenures [due to getting fired/managed out or quitting because they’re not getting their needs met]. We just experienced a 20-month disruption that caused certain previously latent negatives to be newly and massively amplified. Life’s also been harder than usual on many(most?) people. I’d be somewhat shocked if those negatives didn’t get concentrated into the applicant pool as well. To a hiring manager, that would be nearly indistinguishable from “remote work attracts bad apples at a higher rate”. I’m quite pro-remote and think it’s going to end up overall wonderful that the tech world was forced into this massive, synchronized pre/post test. I also see employees who did well in the in-office structure struggle in the higher-discipline required remote model. Those employees are probably best served to return to in-office work.