5 ms·

> Because we just clack on our keyboards all day and do nothing? No, it is because some people have worked at very impressive jobs and probably just clack on k

> Because we just clack on our keyboards all day and do nothing? No, it is because some people have worked at very impressive jobs and probably just clack on keyboards all day and actually did nothing while there, so when you hire them you learn that they actually can't do the job you hired them for. You just can not rely on the CV alone. In the hiring process there has to be some kind of skill test. If it is not a "homework" then it has to be a whiteboard/live coding/system design type of interview and there are a ton of problems with this type of skill test as well. We usually give people the choice which route the candidate would like to do. Take a 1 hour interview or a "homework" assignment which took me about 1 hour to solve. Which is probably best because some people really prefer the homework because they get nervous in interviews. > Will an attorney give you free legal advice until you decide they are fit to represent you, or will you get free surgery until someone proves they won't completely butcher you? I do not know how attorneys or surgeons are hired, but my guess is that the education side of these jobs lines up much closer what is actually needed to do the job (which isn't really the case with Computer Science) and that when they claim to have done X or Y then it was actually them in court or at the operation table and not someone else from their team. Clients select their attorney based on reputation of the attorney or the law firm they work for. For Surgeons it is probably similar. If you have the choice you want to go to the hospital with the best reputation. If the company you apply to already knew your name and reputation beforehand then the skill test is probably also not necessary, but that is not usual in my experience. It also probably helps that both of those jobs require a Professional License to practice these jobs. Maybe if the software industry introduced a Bar Exam then these "homework" assignments would not be needed anymore. > Can you drive a car for free (for 5 - 8 hours) until you decide that's the car you want to buy? Usually you can. At least in my experience. Not fo 5-8 hours of course, but long enough to know. If you know of a better way to hire people: I would be happy to listen.

roflyear 4y ago
The better way is to treat people's time as important as you treat your own and your resources at your company. There is a large company based in NYC that interviews thousands of developers a year, but only hires a few hundred. Each of those devs do a take home project that takes about 16 hours to complete. The project requires nothing to ask, so this company asks everyone. 30,000 hours is a lot of time - it's about 3.5 years of someone's life - and at least this time is spent each year by this company (and they pay nothing for it), not counting the rest of the interview process, because it is cheap for them to do this. And we wonder by productivity is down :) Respect people's time. If it is hard, figure it out. That is your job if you want to hire people and feel good about it.
jzombie 4y ago
An interactive whiteboard / live coding session is by far greater than any homework assignment, in my opinion. W/ an interactive session, you get instant feedback (either verbally or via emotional cues) into what they are expecting. With a homework assignment, it's hard to determine which path to optimize for. If a homework assignment is necessary, it would be better if that were more of a "probationary employment" type scenario, perhaps at a very reduced amount of pay, to only imply that both parties actually have skin in the game. Even better, for helping me judge if it's a decent fit? Show me some code you're using in production so that I can code review it on the call. Surely it's not all hyper sensitive.
- VonGallifrey 4y ago
  I work on the matching engine of a stock exchange. So it kind of is fairly sensitive, but I get what you mean. > interactive session, you get instant feedback (either verbally or via emotional cues) into what they are expecting. For some people, like myself, that is a nightmare scenario. I do not do well in these type of sessions. Which are also not even close to reflecting the real work we do. There are absolutely no meetings I go into that I can't prepare for [1] and there are absolutely no meetings where I have to solve a problem on the spot. Being on the autism spectrum also means "emotional cues" are pretty lost on me. There is also the fact that interviews have to be during normal working hours. Some people prefer to do a "homework" assignment which they can do in an evening or weekend. This is again why we provide the choice. Not everyone is the same and prefers different interview and assessment routes. Both types are useful for different people. > If a homework assignment is necessary, it would be better if that were more of a "probationary employment" type scenario, perhaps at a very reduced amount of pay, to only imply that both parties actually have skin in the game. Really? You would refuse a "homework" assignment, but would agree to "probationary employment"? The later just sounds like WAY more work on both sides. We have discussed something like this in the company I work for, but came to the conclusion that it just is way too much work. Getting the contracts in place and working out the insurance and tax implications and all that. It just is way too much work to do legally, because it would be the same amount of work to just hire them. However: we can't just hire everyone. Maybe if you are already a freelancer beforehand then we could work something out that way, but in the jurisdiction I am in not every software engineer is ready to accept freelance contracts. It is a simpleish process to do, but not everyone does and those that do don't apply for full time positions. [1] You can "prepare" for interviews, but more in a scatter shot approach studying all the interview questions that could possibly be asked. That is not what I mean. There is no meeting I am going into where I do not know the precise topic that the meeting is about.
jdjdndnnddd 4y ago
> In the hiring process there has to be some kind of skill test. No there doesn’t. There isn’t one for the CEO is there?
- sethammons 4y ago
  How many CEOs have you interviewed to run your company? How did you conduct the interview? Do you think that same interview is appropriate for a developer?
- VonGallifrey 4y ago
  The fact of the matter is that without the skill test there are way too many people that are incompetent and you have to have some way to filter those out. I do not know how it works with CEO positions, but I am not hiring CEOs. I do hire software engineers and would like to work with competent people. If you know of a better way then I would like to hear it.
roflyear 4y ago
Then fire those people. It's an easy solution.
- d_e_solomon 4y ago
  It's extremely intensive to onboard a new employee; and extremely disruptive to onboard a new employee and then immediately fire them. It's also very demotivating to the existing team.
  - roflyear 4y ago
    IDK, schools do it all the time.
  - CyberDildonics 4y ago
    I would say it's a lot more disruptive to leave someone incompetent on the team and let everyone else make up their work instead of building a solid team.
- VonGallifrey 4y ago
  We would like to know who is competent before we hire them. The point is that we do these types of tests so that we don't hire them in the first place. We can't hire everybody. I can't hire 20 people (then fire 19 of them) for the 1 position in the 8 Person team I want to fill. That can't work. Just hiring someone and then firing them 2 weeks later is expensive as fuck. We can't just do that until we find someone actually competent. Your "easy solution" is only easy if you don't think about it at all.
  - roflyear 4y ago
    You're just hiring people who care to do these types of tests or are good at them, they don't mean they will be good at the job. I'm not saying you don't do ANYTHING to hire someone. Obviously there needs to be some judgement of skill. But take home projects where you're judged essentially against how much time you put into them (I've personally had projects where they asked me to build an entire web app, it's insane) because ... it's a race to the top in a way here, if you spend more time it's going to look good, because the best projects are from people that spend a lot of time on them... It's just ridiculous. You end up doing 8-16 or more hours of work for a job you likely won't get (it's free for you to ask me to do this test, so you ask everyone to do it). It's not expensive to hire and fire someone. Not that expensive. It's probably worth 20hrs of 100 candidate's time, that's for sure. If you don't think so, I have a bad opinion of you. I'd like to ask you, how many candidates a year do you have turning in take home projects?
deeg 4y ago
I've tried to push my employer(s) to offer the dual paths. Like you I prefer the HW-style process (and think they are a truer judgement) but I understand why some don't like it. I wish more companies would support either path.
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> it is because some people have worked at very impressive jobs... they actually can't do the job > In the hiring process there has to be some kind of skill test Thats a contradiction: 1 - 90% of companies do skill tests 2 - you cannot trust the CV of a candidate even if the company they worked on previously also did a skill test 3 - you think your skill test will enable you to hire the right candidate So everyone is doing tests and everyone is hiring shit candidates anyway? That's literally proof that these tests are worthless. Maybe if the recruiters actually knew what they need from a candidate, companies were clearer about what the job involves, they would stop hiring the wrong people for the wrong job.
- singron 4y ago
  There are some studies that claim a large percentage of people (40%+) lie on their CVs. As someone who hasn't done that and struggles to lie even in games, I have a hard time believing it. But even if 5-10% of people lie, hiring is a lemon market, and you definitely don't want to get stuck with the lemons. Most lying is apparently to change start and end dates of previous employment to cover up short stints where they may have been fired for poor performance, but even if work samples/skill tests/structured interviews were 95% effective, you would still regularly hire duds.
  - VonGallifrey 4y ago
    I believe it. Even with the take home assignment people lie and cheat. We had one person who literally hired a team in India to do it for him. Presumably planning to give his work to them later if he was hired.
    - roflyear 4y ago
      How could you possibly have found out about this? You sound so jaded, I don't blame you, but I hope you're not ever my hiring manager.
      - VonGallifrey 4y ago

roflyear 4y ago

The better way is to treat people's time as important as you treat your own and your resources at your company. There is a large company based in NYC that interviews thousands of developers a year, but only hires a few hundred. Each of those devs do a take home project that takes about 16 hours to complete. The project requires nothing to ask, so this company asks everyone. 30,000 hours is a lot of time - it's about 3.5 years of someone's life - and at least this time is spent each year by this company (and they pay nothing for it), not counting the rest of the interview process, because it is cheap for them to do this. And we wonder by productivity is down :) Respect people's time. If it is hard, figure it out. That is your job if you want to hire people and feel good about it.

jzombie 4y ago

An interactive whiteboard / live coding session is by far greater than any homework assignment, in my opinion. W/ an interactive session, you get instant feedback (either verbally or via emotional cues) into what they are expecting. With a homework assignment, it's hard to determine which path to optimize for. If a homework assignment is necessary, it would be better if that were more of a "probationary employment" type scenario, perhaps at a very reduced amount of pay, to only imply that both parties actually have skin in the game. Even better, for helping me judge if it's a decent fit? Show me some code you're using in production so that I can code review it on the call. Surely it's not all hyper sensitive.

VonGallifrey 4y ago
I work on the matching engine of a stock exchange. So it kind of is fairly sensitive, but I get what you mean. > interactive session, you get instant feedback (either verbally or via emotional cues) into what they are expecting. For some people, like myself, that is a nightmare scenario. I do not do well in these type of sessions. Which are also not even close to reflecting the real work we do. There are absolutely no meetings I go into that I can't prepare for [1] and there are absolutely no meetings where I have to solve a problem on the spot. Being on the autism spectrum also means "emotional cues" are pretty lost on me. There is also the fact that interviews have to be during normal working hours. Some people prefer to do a "homework" assignment which they can do in an evening or weekend. This is again why we provide the choice. Not everyone is the same and prefers different interview and assessment routes. Both types are useful for different people. > If a homework assignment is necessary, it would be better if that were more of a "probationary employment" type scenario, perhaps at a very reduced amount of pay, to only imply that both parties actually have skin in the game. Really? You would refuse a "homework" assignment, but would agree to "probationary employment"? The later just sounds like WAY more work on both sides. We have discussed something like this in the company I work for, but came to the conclusion that it just is way too much work. Getting the contracts in place and working out the insurance and tax implications and all that. It just is way too much work to do legally, because it would be the same amount of work to just hire them. However: we can't just hire everyone. Maybe if you are already a freelancer beforehand then we could work something out that way, but in the jurisdiction I am in not every software engineer is ready to accept freelance contracts. It is a simpleish process to do, but not everyone does and those that do don't apply for full time positions. [1] You can "prepare" for interviews, but more in a scatter shot approach studying all the interview questions that could possibly be asked. That is not what I mean. There is no meeting I am going into where I do not know the precise topic that the meeting is about.

jdjdndnnddd 4y ago

> In the hiring process there has to be some kind of skill test. No there doesn’t. There isn’t one for the CEO is there?

sethammons 4y ago
How many CEOs have you interviewed to run your company? How did you conduct the interview? Do you think that same interview is appropriate for a developer?
VonGallifrey 4y ago
The fact of the matter is that without the skill test there are way too many people that are incompetent and you have to have some way to filter those out. I do not know how it works with CEO positions, but I am not hiring CEOs. I do hire software engineers and would like to work with competent people. If you know of a better way then I would like to hear it.

roflyear 4y ago

Then fire those people. It's an easy solution.

d_e_solomon 4y ago
It's extremely intensive to onboard a new employee; and extremely disruptive to onboard a new employee and then immediately fire them. It's also very demotivating to the existing team.
- roflyear 4y ago
  IDK, schools do it all the time.
- CyberDildonics 4y ago
  I would say it's a lot more disruptive to leave someone incompetent on the team and let everyone else make up their work instead of building a solid team.
VonGallifrey 4y ago
We would like to know who is competent before we hire them. The point is that we do these types of tests so that we don't hire them in the first place. We can't hire everybody. I can't hire 20 people (then fire 19 of them) for the 1 position in the 8 Person team I want to fill. That can't work. Just hiring someone and then firing them 2 weeks later is expensive as fuck. We can't just do that until we find someone actually competent. Your "easy solution" is only easy if you don't think about it at all.
- roflyear 4y ago
  You're just hiring people who care to do these types of tests or are good at them, they don't mean they will be good at the job. I'm not saying you don't do ANYTHING to hire someone. Obviously there needs to be some judgement of skill. But take home projects where you're judged essentially against how much time you put into them (I've personally had projects where they asked me to build an entire web app, it's insane) because ... it's a race to the top in a way here, if you spend more time it's going to look good, because the best projects are from people that spend a lot of time on them... It's just ridiculous. You end up doing 8-16 or more hours of work for a job you likely won't get (it's free for you to ask me to do this test, so you ask everyone to do it). It's not expensive to hire and fire someone. Not that expensive. It's probably worth 20hrs of 100 candidate's time, that's for sure. If you don't think so, I have a bad opinion of you. I'd like to ask you, how many candidates a year do you have turning in take home projects?

deeg 4y ago

I've tried to push my employer(s) to offer the dual paths. Like you I prefer the HW-style process (and think they are a truer judgement) but I understand why some don't like it. I wish more companies would support either path.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago

> it is because some people have worked at very impressive jobs... they actually can't do the job > In the hiring process there has to be some kind of skill test Thats a contradiction: 1 - 90% of companies do skill tests 2 - you cannot trust the CV of a candidate even if the company they worked on previously also did a skill test 3 - you think your skill test will enable you to hire the right candidate So everyone is doing tests and everyone is hiring shit candidates anyway? That's literally proof that these tests are worthless. Maybe if the recruiters actually knew what they need from a candidate, companies were clearer about what the job involves, they would stop hiring the wrong people for the wrong job.

singron 4y ago
There are some studies that claim a large percentage of people (40%+) lie on their CVs. As someone who hasn't done that and struggles to lie even in games, I have a hard time believing it. But even if 5-10% of people lie, hiring is a lemon market, and you definitely don't want to get stuck with the lemons. Most lying is apparently to change start and end dates of previous employment to cover up short stints where they may have been fired for poor performance, but even if work samples/skill tests/structured interviews were 95% effective, you would still regularly hire duds.
- VonGallifrey 4y ago
  I believe it. Even with the take home assignment people lie and cheat. We had one person who literally hired a team in India to do it for him. Presumably planning to give his work to them later if he was hired.
  - roflyear 4y ago
    How could you possibly have found out about this? You sound so jaded, I don't blame you, but I hope you're not ever my hiring manager.
    - VonGallifrey 4y ago