2 ms·

This is a throwaway because I'm just an engineer on the team wondering if there's something obvious we're doing wrong, and I don't imagine this would be conside

This is a throwaway because I'm just an engineer on the team wondering if there's something obvious we're doing wrong, and I don't imagine this would be considered desirable attention by management. Would posting a job ad on AskHN requesting feedback be acceptable? I ask because I'd have expected to see it a bunch if it were. @dang would be very appreciative of your word one way or another. Thanks mattbee.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mattbee 4y ago
Ohhhh OK. I'd say don't post your actual ad because we will find you and give you more help than you wanted ;) Like maybe your team page is all white men, or your defence contracts are very prominent, or your CEO is a public dong. It's a bit of a yellow flag that you don't feel you can go to your managers with this to help fix a team you're obviously invested in? But here's two tips that you might be able to implement or influence by yourself: 1) Treat incoming candidates like GOLD. Respond to them within hours, same day where at all possible. Make decisions really fast, schedule interviews within 1-2 days, drop other things to make that happen. Have future managers & engineers communicate directly, lightly backed up by HR if you have that function (and you trust them). Keep. It. Moving. Make it clear their time is more valuable than yours. 2) Document the whole interview process up-front, put it prominently on your ads, specify the damned salary, and stick to your word the whole way. If you execute on both of these points, the FAANGs will not be able to come close in a really critical part of the process. They will be unclear about what happens next, who you're meeting, how important it is, maybe it will be a week, maybe it will be 12 weeks, who knows. But they got the prestige and the big bucks, and candidates will put up with a lot for that. (fwiw, I co-designed careers.bytemark.co.uk/full-process for most of the above reasons, and my current role went from introductory chat->3 interviews->contract signed in about 10 days flat - I like fast recruitment!).
- pcthrowaway 4y ago
  > careers.bytemark.co.uk/full-process This is really cool!
- Beltalowda 4y ago
  > Have future managers & engineers communicate directly, lightly backed up by HR if you have that function (and you trust them). Keep. It. Moving. Make it clear their time is more valuable than yours. Yeah, this. Not that I dislike recruiters or HR folks or don't appreciate the work they do, but with someone with engineering experience I can talk to them on an equal level and don't need to "dumb down" describing my skills or past experiences, and I can usually be a lot more straightforward and/or have an actual conversation instead of reading my CV out loud, which is what a lot of initial screenings are like (it's okay to use the CV as a starting point for the conversation). Talking to an engineer is also a signal I'm being taken serious as a candidate. I get that people use recruiters for an initial screen, but if it's "recruiter → another recruiter → HR person → coding test → finally I talk to a damn engineer (or engineering lead)" then that's a bit of a turn-off. At this point you're expecting me to spend time to "prove" my technical skills and I don't even know if I want to work for you because I have no idea what your engineering is like beyond the buzzwords your HR people dropped (which is very little information). If you've got more candidates than you know what to do with then that's fine, but if not... Using a recruiter for the initial (short) screening is fine to go through some basic preconditions from both sides, but the second person should really be an engineering lead if you're desperate for people IMHO. If you do insist on a code test and you intent on hiring the person if nothing strange comes falling out then say so. A lot of times I have the impression these things are shotgunned to a bunch of candidates.
- bombcar 4y ago
  1) Treat incoming candidates like GOLD. Respond to them within hours, same day where at all possible. This is a huge point and something to work on. Act quickly and work out as many things in advance as you can. Don't be like unnamed company X who kept changing interview times and stretching it out so the candidate just took the offer from unnamed large company Y instead. If you get some nibbles on your pipeline treat them quite fast, and note where they drop off. Likely for the process you have the salary is too low, and people skip out to find the same money easier or more money at the same difficulty.
- geekbird 4y ago
  This also includes being very, very, very upfront on whether your "remote" is: a) real, honest 100% remote, b) 100% remote unless you are within X miles of the office, in which case it's hybrid, c) hybrid that your management thinks is "remote", d) "remote until..." which means you will be called back into the office at the C-suite's whim, or e) on-site unless you are sick or have to meet a repair person at home.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

mattbee 4y ago

Ohhhh OK. I'd say don't post your actual ad because we will find you and give you more help than you wanted ;) Like maybe your team page is all white men, or your defence contracts are very prominent, or your CEO is a public dong. It's a bit of a yellow flag that you don't feel you can go to your managers with this to help fix a team you're obviously invested in? But here's two tips that you might be able to implement or influence by yourself: 1) Treat incoming candidates like GOLD. Respond to them within hours, same day where at all possible. Make decisions really fast, schedule interviews within 1-2 days, drop other things to make that happen. Have future managers & engineers communicate directly, lightly backed up by HR if you have that function (and you trust them). Keep. It. Moving. Make it clear their time is more valuable than yours. 2) Document the whole interview process up-front, put it prominently on your ads, specify the damned salary, and stick to your word the whole way. If you execute on both of these points, the FAANGs will not be able to come close in a really critical part of the process. They will be unclear about what happens next, who you're meeting, how important it is, maybe it will be a week, maybe it will be 12 weeks, who knows. But they got the prestige and the big bucks, and candidates will put up with a lot for that. (fwiw, I co-designed careers.bytemark.co.uk/full-process for most of the above reasons, and my current role went from introductory chat->3 interviews->contract signed in about 10 days flat - I like fast recruitment!).

pcthrowaway 4y ago
> careers.bytemark.co.uk/full-process This is really cool!
Beltalowda 4y ago
> Have future managers & engineers communicate directly, lightly backed up by HR if you have that function (and you trust them). Keep. It. Moving. Make it clear their time is more valuable than yours. Yeah, this. Not that I dislike recruiters or HR folks or don't appreciate the work they do, but with someone with engineering experience I can talk to them on an equal level and don't need to "dumb down" describing my skills or past experiences, and I can usually be a lot more straightforward and/or have an actual conversation instead of reading my CV out loud, which is what a lot of initial screenings are like (it's okay to use the CV as a starting point for the conversation). Talking to an engineer is also a signal I'm being taken serious as a candidate. I get that people use recruiters for an initial screen, but if it's "recruiter → another recruiter → HR person → coding test → finally I talk to a damn engineer (or engineering lead)" then that's a bit of a turn-off. At this point you're expecting me to spend time to "prove" my technical skills and I don't even know if I want to work for you because I have no idea what your engineering is like beyond the buzzwords your HR people dropped (which is very little information). If you've got more candidates than you know what to do with then that's fine, but if not... Using a recruiter for the initial (short) screening is fine to go through some basic preconditions from both sides, but the second person should really be an engineering lead if you're desperate for people IMHO. If you do insist on a code test and you intent on hiring the person if nothing strange comes falling out then say so. A lot of times I have the impression these things are shotgunned to a bunch of candidates.
bombcar 4y ago
1) Treat incoming candidates like GOLD. Respond to them within hours, same day where at all possible. This is a huge point and something to work on. Act quickly and work out as many things in advance as you can. Don't be like unnamed company X who kept changing interview times and stretching it out so the candidate just took the offer from unnamed large company Y instead. If you get some nibbles on your pipeline treat them quite fast, and note where they drop off. Likely for the process you have the salary is too low, and people skip out to find the same money easier or more money at the same difficulty.
geekbird 4y ago
This also includes being very, very, very upfront on whether your "remote" is: a) real, honest 100% remote, b) 100% remote unless you are within X miles of the office, in which case it's hybrid, c) hybrid that your management thinks is "remote", d) "remote until..." which means you will be called back into the office at the C-suite's whim, or e) on-site unless you are sick or have to meet a repair person at home.