4 ms·

I broke the rules and read the article before commenting. The article concludes > The bottom line: it is far less damaging to score 1 rating point lower on Co

I broke the rules and read the article before commenting. The article concludes > The bottom line: it is far less damaging to score 1 rating point lower on Communicate, and it is much more beneficial to score 1 rating point higher on Code and/or on Solve. Talk is indeed cheap, and indeed, coding and problem solving is what you need to show in a coding interview. which is the opposite of what the two current HN responses predict.

rvense 4y ago
I can't disagree with the conclusion that coding skills are more predictive of interview success (although it surprises me), but I will say from my work experience that, after a certain point, I value communication skills much more than coding ability, and I would guess they are, in many places, more predictive of success on the job than raw technical ability.
- zamfi 4y ago
  Well, these results definitely validate that. Once you're topped out in coding ability, better communication only helps! Or were you saying that at some point you stopped caring about coding ability and valued strong communication even in the absence of the ability to problem solve and write code?
  - rvense 4y ago
    I just mean that so long as someone's at a certain technical level, I'm more interested in their other skills, where communication would be one of the most important. For context, I'm in fairly mundane web app development, and technical issues (getting stuff to work at all, or perform well enough) have hardly ever been the main problem on my projects. The hardest part is almost always figuring out what to build.
  - geoffjentry 4y ago
    > Well, these results definitely validate that. Once you're topped out in coding ability, better communication only helps! I think it's close to this, but not quite as it's a sliding scale and not a step function. From a business perspective, there tends to be diminishing returns as one's coding skills improve. And that's the point where returns on communication skills tends to become more important. So more often than not the higher the level the more important communication skills become over coding skills. This is not saying a high level engineer can be all talk and no ability, but rather a great communicator/good coder might become more valuable than a good communicator/great coder. Apologies for all the hedging in the above. I'm trying to take into account that there are always exceptions to the above. Some positions need that absolute wizard. It's the exception to the rule, but it exists.
    - zamfi 4y ago
      > This is not saying a high level engineer can be all talk and no ability, but rather a great communicator/good coder might become more valuable than a good communicator/great coder I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek there, but I will point out that folks who are good coders and great communicators often find roles that are more rewarding in every way outside the IC SWE universe, and so are probably poorly represented in this sample…
atoav 4y ago
My guess would have been that communications don't have an huge impact until they are exceptionally bad or exceptionally good.
BlargMcLarg 4y ago
It's what most of HN and Reddit does. Article even mentions communication is still important (hey guys guess what, reading the article also is part of communication). Then there's the crowd which will kneejerk towards "rather someone who communicates than a jerk who won't communicate". Really, most people qualify for the former regardless of their technical capabilities. It's a comparison which barely happens in real life. Most "toxic" people are very easy to filter. Most people don't lack communicative skills. Job adverts and interviews very clearly filter out technically deficient people (why else do you think many of them are looking for i+2 people for i skill level jobs?), and don't optimize for quick, communicative learners at all. That's not to mention communication skills are much more difficult to quantify than tech skills. One's "he's poor at communication" is another's "he's great at communication". See endless discussions about meetings and meetings being held as a "good at communication" standard.
BiteCode_dev 4y ago
I assume HN responses are based in experience, while this article shows only one thing: "companies rate communication in a certain way in remote technical interview". The "Does communication matter in technical interviews?" is not even deserved. It's a terrible article, most likely an ad, with an artifical conclusions about a low quality biased data source composed of a one-sided, subjective star post interview star rating. As for my experience, I've been hired to perform technical interview on behalf of companies, I hired people for my companies, and I've been interviewed many time. And the answer is: it depends. It depends of the person, of the job, of the context, and what you consider communication. I have an ex that is incredibly incompetent and not very bright, but she is amazingly sexy and dresses well, and gets hired very easily. I have another one that is the best at her job, she is an angel for customers, but she is shy, doesn't explain things well, and is not as sexy. She tanks interviews regularly. Is that communication? When I was young, I traded my contact lens for glasses and noted that, as a geek, people took me more seriously in interviews with glasses. Is that communication? Last month, I interviewed a guy who said "I like to work at home, this allows me to be at ease when I want to code 12 hours straight". I knew he was boasting - people capable of focusing for 12 hours are very rare - and rejected him because I want to avoid BS. But he came from a trading firm, where this may be what you are supposed to say. Was it good communication? "Communication" is not unidimensional. It's what you say, and don't say, when you say it, how and to whom. It's also what you convey by you body, your look, your voice. Being late is communicating something. Saying "I don't know" is communicating something. And the context in which you are saying it is as important as what you are saying. A good job here could be a social mistake there. A few star rating is communicating to me that one knows nothing about the topic.

rvense 4y ago

I can't disagree with the conclusion that coding skills are more predictive of interview success (although it surprises me), but I will say from my work experience that, after a certain point, I value communication skills much more than coding ability, and I would guess they are, in many places, more predictive of success on the job than raw technical ability.

zamfi 4y ago
Well, these results definitely validate that. Once you're topped out in coding ability, better communication only helps! Or were you saying that at some point you stopped caring about coding ability and valued strong communication even in the absence of the ability to problem solve and write code?
- rvense 4y ago
  I just mean that so long as someone's at a certain technical level, I'm more interested in their other skills, where communication would be one of the most important. For context, I'm in fairly mundane web app development, and technical issues (getting stuff to work at all, or perform well enough) have hardly ever been the main problem on my projects. The hardest part is almost always figuring out what to build.
- geoffjentry 4y ago
  > Well, these results definitely validate that. Once you're topped out in coding ability, better communication only helps! I think it's close to this, but not quite as it's a sliding scale and not a step function. From a business perspective, there tends to be diminishing returns as one's coding skills improve. And that's the point where returns on communication skills tends to become more important. So more often than not the higher the level the more important communication skills become over coding skills. This is not saying a high level engineer can be all talk and no ability, but rather a great communicator/good coder might become more valuable than a good communicator/great coder. Apologies for all the hedging in the above. I'm trying to take into account that there are always exceptions to the above. Some positions need that absolute wizard. It's the exception to the rule, but it exists.
  - zamfi 4y ago
    > This is not saying a high level engineer can be all talk and no ability, but rather a great communicator/good coder might become more valuable than a good communicator/great coder I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek there, but I will point out that folks who are good coders and great communicators often find roles that are more rewarding in every way outside the IC SWE universe, and so are probably poorly represented in this sample…

atoav 4y ago

My guess would have been that communications don't have an huge impact until they are exceptionally bad or exceptionally good.

BlargMcLarg 4y ago

It's what most of HN and Reddit does. Article even mentions communication is still important (hey guys guess what, reading the article also is part of communication). Then there's the crowd which will kneejerk towards "rather someone who communicates than a jerk who won't communicate". Really, most people qualify for the former regardless of their technical capabilities. It's a comparison which barely happens in real life. Most "toxic" people are very easy to filter. Most people don't lack communicative skills. Job adverts and interviews very clearly filter out technically deficient people (why else do you think many of them are looking for i+2 people for i skill level jobs?), and don't optimize for quick, communicative learners at all. That's not to mention communication skills are much more difficult to quantify than tech skills. One's "he's poor at communication" is another's "he's great at communication". See endless discussions about meetings and meetings being held as a "good at communication" standard.

BiteCode_dev 4y ago

I assume HN responses are based in experience, while this article shows only one thing: "companies rate communication in a certain way in remote technical interview". The "Does communication matter in technical interviews?" is not even deserved. It's a terrible article, most likely an ad, with an artifical conclusions about a low quality biased data source composed of a one-sided, subjective star post interview star rating. As for my experience, I've been hired to perform technical interview on behalf of companies, I hired people for my companies, and I've been interviewed many time. And the answer is: it depends. It depends of the person, of the job, of the context, and what you consider communication. I have an ex that is incredibly incompetent and not very bright, but she is amazingly sexy and dresses well, and gets hired very easily. I have another one that is the best at her job, she is an angel for customers, but she is shy, doesn't explain things well, and is not as sexy. She tanks interviews regularly. Is that communication? When I was young, I traded my contact lens for glasses and noted that, as a geek, people took me more seriously in interviews with glasses. Is that communication? Last month, I interviewed a guy who said "I like to work at home, this allows me to be at ease when I want to code 12 hours straight". I knew he was boasting - people capable of focusing for 12 hours are very rare - and rejected him because I want to avoid BS. But he came from a trading firm, where this may be what you are supposed to say. Was it good communication? "Communication" is not unidimensional. It's what you say, and don't say, when you say it, how and to whom. It's also what you convey by you body, your look, your voice. Being late is communicating something. Saying "I don't know" is communicating something. And the context in which you are saying it is as important as what you are saying. A good job here could be a social mistake there. A few star rating is communicating to me that one knows nothing about the topic.