2 ms·
There's a certain amount of selection bias here, given that I've obviously already gone through a similar sort of process to get hired there, but I don't think
by kemayo 15y ago
There's a certain amount of selection bias here, given that I've obviously already gone through a similar sort of process to get hired there, but I don't think it's terrible to ask an applicant to do a small proof-of-competence task before you tie up a bunch of time in talking to them. For what it's worth, it's somewhere in the half hour range for that exercise, and I've certainly spent longer than that tweaking a resume + cover letter when applying for jobs in the past.
Ultimately "because we don't like you" is the reason you'll lose any job. The main thing that makes us decide someone isn't working out is if they're not performing, though. I don't think I've seen anyone get dropped after the trial for any other reason.
- jwegan 15y agoI think the consensus on HN is that your company's hiring practices are not normal. While some percentage of good developers will put up with your practices; I think a much larger percentage pass on you before you ever hear from them. As you alluded to, everyone working at your company has self selected themselves to work there and must fall into the "some percentage" category. Of course all of you think this hiring strategy is a great idea, since all of you put up with it. However, if you really want to increase P(we hire you), it might be time to break out of the groupthink and try something new.