4 ms·

are you requiring coding interviews?

by b20000 5y ago

duped 5y ago
Yes. Unfortunately it's necessary, you can't really trust a resume or recommendation and for an org like ours we can't spend a ton of resources ramping people up. I don't want to doxx myself here but there were two notable cases I can think of where in one, the code assignment saved us from a bad hire and another where we didn't do enough and we made a bad hire. Both individuals ostensibly had deep experience, but they weren't a good fit for our organization. Everyone has to contribute code directly, we can't have a pipeline where some folks are doing high level architecting and delegating the coding/impl details to juniors yet.
- b20000 5y ago
  coding interviews do not guarantee that someone can actually write software. it is just an indication if the person grinded leetcode non stop and memorized all the solutions to the leetcode questions.
- karmakaze 5y ago
  Is it though? I imagine say a staff developer with decades of experience, you could check a reference and verify that the candidate did hold a stated role for x years. That seems probably more of a positive signal than doing a leetcode exercise. Edit: I think I just found my new BS company test. If rationality, sanity, and pragmatism doesn't prevail, I don't want to work there.
  - duped 5y ago
    You're preaching to the choir, but I don't choose our technical assessment. That said, it's not leetcode. I think that can work for plenty of orgs, but I'm not sure about my team. I've already worked with two people who had great references and decades of experience who couldn't contribute to what we are building due to their weak technical skills. That doesn't mean there isn't an org out there that they will fit in with better, but the current process we use was derived from experience. It's not hazing, like Google.
    - karmakaze 5y ago
      When I'm in charge of hiring for a highly technical role, I'll ask them about a particularly challenging problem that they solved. The ongoing discussion with them getting me to understand the problem and solution in as much detail as they can describe serves as my 'turing test' that's hard to fake moreso than a hit-or-miss coding problem.
      - b20000 5y ago
        some of the interviews I've been through started like that. Which is great. Then, it quickly went on to a coding test where I was asked to implement the optimal solution to a problem, which a certain woman, who wrote a book on coding interviews, and who will remain unnamed, needed almost 2 hours, to arrive at the optimal solution. I was expected to produce said optimal solution in less than 5 minutes. Needless to say, I moved on.

are you requiring coding interviews?

by b20000 5y ago

are you requiring coding interviews?

Yes. Unfortunately it's necessary, you can't really trust a resume or recommendation and for an org like ours we can't spend a ton of resources ramping people up. I don't want to doxx myself here but there were two notable cases I can think of where in one, the code assignment saved us from a bad hire and another where we didn't do enough and we made a bad hire. Both individuals ostensibly had deep experience, but they weren't a good fit for our organization. Everyone has to contribute code directly, we can't have a pipeline where some folks are doing high level architecting and delegating the coding/impl details to juniors yet.

b20000 5y ago
coding interviews do not guarantee that someone can actually write software. it is just an indication if the person grinded leetcode non stop and memorized all the solutions to the leetcode questions.
karmakaze 5y ago
Is it though? I imagine say a staff developer with decades of experience, you could check a reference and verify that the candidate did hold a stated role for x years. That seems probably more of a positive signal than doing a leetcode exercise. Edit: I think I just found my new BS company test. If rationality, sanity, and pragmatism doesn't prevail, I don't want to work there.
- duped 5y ago
  You're preaching to the choir, but I don't choose our technical assessment. That said, it's not leetcode. I think that can work for plenty of orgs, but I'm not sure about my team. I've already worked with two people who had great references and decades of experience who couldn't contribute to what we are building due to their weak technical skills. That doesn't mean there isn't an org out there that they will fit in with better, but the current process we use was derived from experience. It's not hazing, like Google.
  - karmakaze 5y ago
    When I'm in charge of hiring for a highly technical role, I'll ask them about a particularly challenging problem that they solved. The ongoing discussion with them getting me to understand the problem and solution in as much detail as they can describe serves as my 'turing test' that's hard to fake moreso than a hit-or-miss coding problem.
    - b20000 5y ago
      some of the interviews I've been through started like that. Which is great. Then, it quickly went on to a coding test where I was asked to implement the optimal solution to a problem, which a certain woman, who wrote a book on coding interviews, and who will remain unnamed, needed almost 2 hours, to arrive at the optimal solution. I was expected to produce said optimal solution in less than 5 minutes. Needless to say, I moved on.