6 ms·

I'm sure it results in some false negatives, but I don't know of a better way to filter the applicant pool to something reasonable. And so far it's helped me hi

I'm sure it results in some false negatives, but I don't know of a better way to filter the applicant pool to something reasonable. And so far it's helped me hire a fantastic team of developers, many of whom don't have the standard credentials you might look for on a résumé. That said, I do think I'm going to try and simplify the question even further, since I think having anything at all will accomplish the goal, so there's no point making people do any more work than absolutely necessary.

thaumasiotes 4y ago
> I'm sure it results in some false negatives, but I don't know of a better way to filter the applicant pool to something reasonable. You mentioned a better way in your original comment: >>> we intentionally put a minor roadblock (a fizzbuzz-level coding problem) in our job application, specifically to filter out those applicants unwilling or unable to put in the slightest effort to apply. (And we see a very similar percentage who don't bother to complete it - at least 90%.) The question is intentionally easy Use a difficult question, and you'll get a smaller pool of higher-quality applicants.
- tempestn 4y ago
  We do use difficult questions later in the process. I don't believe it's reasonable to put a difficult question right in the job application before the applicant even knows if we're going to respond. That's why that question is intentionally easy. As another reply said, it's basically like a captcha.
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    What is the benefit of the first stage of the process? If you do well at the first stage, and poorly at the second stage, can you be hired?
    - tempestn 4y ago
      The first stage is just a quick question we ask people to answer along with their initial application. The second stage is what we use as an actual interview process (described in more detail in other replies here). The purpose of the first stage is just to filter out the large percentage of applicants who are unqualified and just spamming out résumés. Passing that alone is of course not enough for someone to be hired.
      - thaumasiotes 4y ago
        Well, again, what is the benefit of having a multi-stage process? Is it helping the applicants? Is it helping you? Start with a harder question, and you're doing them a favor at the same time you do one for yourself. Why would you need one filter for "qualifications > 1" and a second one for "qualifications > 4" when you could just apply "qualifications > 4"?
        willsmith72 4y ago
        I couldn't disagree more with you, and I wonder if you've ever managed a hiring process. If you put a hard programming question as a requirement just to APPLY for a job, I don't think you would get any good candidates at all. It's just not worth the time. When you're applying for a job you have no idea if the company is going to be interested at all, and that's fine, because there are just so many variables involved. They could have just found someone and not yet taken the ad down. They could be about to receive an application from someone even better than you. They (or their system) might have some inherent bias against you, maybe even accidentally (degree > bootcamp, US college vs Canadian college, etc.). When you're applying for a job it's just not feasible to go around doing HARD programming questions every time, because for so many reasons out of your control the company might just ignore you. And that's fine, that's for them to decide. But it means doing what you're saying would be a terrible, terrible idea, and actually most likely get the worst candidates who don't have any other options but can find a solution to your problem online.
        thaumasiotes 4y ago

thaumasiotes 4y ago

> I'm sure it results in some false negatives, but I don't know of a better way to filter the applicant pool to something reasonable. You mentioned a better way in your original comment: >>> we intentionally put a minor roadblock (a fizzbuzz-level coding problem) in our job application, specifically to filter out those applicants unwilling or unable to put in the slightest effort to apply. (And we see a very similar percentage who don't bother to complete it - at least 90%.) The question is intentionally easy Use a difficult question, and you'll get a smaller pool of higher-quality applicants.

tempestn 4y ago
We do use difficult questions later in the process. I don't believe it's reasonable to put a difficult question right in the job application before the applicant even knows if we're going to respond. That's why that question is intentionally easy. As another reply said, it's basically like a captcha.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  What is the benefit of the first stage of the process? If you do well at the first stage, and poorly at the second stage, can you be hired?
  - tempestn 4y ago
    The first stage is just a quick question we ask people to answer along with their initial application. The second stage is what we use as an actual interview process (described in more detail in other replies here). The purpose of the first stage is just to filter out the large percentage of applicants who are unqualified and just spamming out résumés. Passing that alone is of course not enough for someone to be hired.
    - thaumasiotes 4y ago
      Well, again, what is the benefit of having a multi-stage process? Is it helping the applicants? Is it helping you? Start with a harder question, and you're doing them a favor at the same time you do one for yourself. Why would you need one filter for "qualifications > 1" and a second one for "qualifications > 4" when you could just apply "qualifications > 4"?
      - willsmith72 4y ago
        I couldn't disagree more with you, and I wonder if you've ever managed a hiring process. If you put a hard programming question as a requirement just to APPLY for a job, I don't think you would get any good candidates at all. It's just not worth the time. When you're applying for a job you have no idea if the company is going to be interested at all, and that's fine, because there are just so many variables involved. They could have just found someone and not yet taken the ad down. They could be about to receive an application from someone even better than you. They (or their system) might have some inherent bias against you, maybe even accidentally (degree > bootcamp, US college vs Canadian college, etc.). When you're applying for a job it's just not feasible to go around doing HARD programming questions every time, because for so many reasons out of your control the company might just ignore you. And that's fine, that's for them to decide. But it means doing what you're saying would be a terrible, terrible idea, and actually most likely get the worst candidates who don't have any other options but can find a solution to your problem online.
        thaumasiotes 4y ago