5 ms·

Didn’t end up going to work for the friend, but the situation still strained the friendship. An engineer I worked with for several years (and became friends wi

Didn’t end up going to work for the friend, but the situation still strained the friendship. An engineer I worked with for several years (and became friends with outside of work) started his own company, a couple of years later he recruited me to join as his business was taking off. He’d also brought in a business guy who seemed to put in lots of processes including a mandatory take-home coding assignment as part of their interview process. So anyhow, this guy who I’d worked alongside for years, who’d seen plenty of my code and wanted me to join his company, was going to make me do this homework to get an offer. So I did a verrry basic solution to this thing and sent it back. A bit later I got an email from someone in their office that they regretted they didn’t have any positions that fit my experience. Later my friend (and his wife) encouraged me to do the homework thing again but I laughed them off. I didn’t want to work for a small company that somehow had hamstrung itself with unnecessary processes that kept the founder from hiring someone he wanted to hire. A few years later they sold and a couple engineers I know made multiple millions. So yeah, I dunno, I felt good about my decision at the time, but in retrospect it would have been better to act like any job seeker and just go to work for my friend. Your mileage will certainly vary.

mewpmewp2 3y ago
That is such a bizarre story.
FreakLegion 3y ago
Separate from whether the process was any good, your friend wasn't necessarily wrong not to make you an exception to it. Nepotism can be pretty rough on a team's morale.
- mewziq 3y ago
  Programmers are the least capable engineers but the most cocksure and entitled Am an EE and I cannot stand the CS people at work. Oh you wrapped well known math in machine syntax sugar, none of which you invented, or defined? High 5, edgelord.
- saghm 3y ago
  Yeah, if I were someone working at a company having gone through the "normal" hiring process and then someone new joined my team and I found out they didn't have to go through it because they thought it was a waste of time and they were friends with the founder, that would feel pretty shitty.
  - em-bee 3y ago
    it depends on their previous relationship. if they have worked together before then the test should be redundant. so why should i feel bothered that they didn't have to do a test?
    - saintfire 3y ago
      If the founder is not really involved with the hiring team then you are essentially going over them without them having any idea how you work. While I know what you're saying that the founder is vouching for your experience, its still going to cause friction, I think. Especially, again, to all the people that fought for the job.
      - em-bee 3y ago
        sure, i am thinking of cases where the founder is still involved with hiring, and especially more so, where the founder is the lead developer and still coding. i agree with you that once the company is large enough that the founder is no longer involved with hiring decisions then they should not just go over the hiring team. more specifically, as in this article: https://www.cio.com/article/236189/5-reasons-ceos-should-be-involved-in-hiring-decisions.html https://www.cio.com/article/236189/5-reasons-ceos-should-be-... i am talking about smaller companies that don't yet have senior management and HR teams
- GandalfTheWhite 3y ago
  If I was another employee or applicant, I would be legitimately upset if someone didn't have to jump through the same hoops that I did simply because he knew the boss.
  - Solvency 3y ago
    That's insane. My CEO is 60 years old and has built and sold 4 different companies before this. His network of former colleagues is deep. It would be childish for me to believe all of the potential people from his former working relationships should be beholden to the exact same homework assignments as someone who is a complete stranger.
citizenpaul 3y ago
Did you ask them if they were advised by HR/legal to do these tests to everyone to avoid possible future discrimination lawsuits?
neilv 3y ago
> So anyhow, this guy who I’d worked alongside for years, who’d seen plenty of my code and wanted me to join his company, was going to make me do this homework to get an offer. Had your friend delegated the engineering hiring decisions/process to someone else, and was trying not to step on their toes? Or friend had instituted the process, and didn't think it would go well with the other people, if you looked like a nepotism hire who bypassed the process? Or friend was trying to put you in your employee place (where you had to meet his process), or otherwise was getting a bit full of himself, or a bit sleep-deprived and nutty?
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > Or friend was trying to put you in your employee place (where you had to meet his process), or otherwise was getting a bit full of himself, or a bit sleep-deprived and nutty? This would be a strange take. CEO shouldn't be letting people in on the nod. If hiring is someone else's job, CEO shouldn't be overriding. At best suggesting candidates but saying that it's totally the hiring manager's call. If a candidate didn't pass a hiring process because they didn't put effort in as they felt they should get the job due to connections, I would agree with the company's decision.
  - machomaster 3y ago
    The purpose of a hiring process (as in take home assignment) is to see that the person is competent to do the job. It was already established that he was. So following a formal process is a stupid waste of time (on both ends) that has nothing to do with strengthening the company and is simply an unnecessary ego trip. The company disqualified itself.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      How was it established?
      - wifipunk 3y ago
        They mean it was established by the CEO's experience with him as an engineer. To the company it was never, and as high a recommendation as the CEO would be; most people would agree they did the right thing. Unless you're hired before a hiring manager or whomever is doing the hiring you should follow the process. If you treat it like a joke because you feel entitled by your connections then be willing to accept the outcome.
asjir 3y ago
Was it 10, 100 employees at the time?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
GandalfTheWhite 3y ago
I can see your perspective, and it would be reasonable for them to say, "I already know this guy's work. He doesn't have to do the take-home.", which is not like saying, "I already know this guy from [irrelevant source]." I would do this, and have before. You also could have just smiled and nodded and actually done a good job to demonstrate your skills. It looks to me like you pulled your punches.

mewpmewp2 3y ago

That is such a bizarre story.

FreakLegion 3y ago

Separate from whether the process was any good, your friend wasn't necessarily wrong not to make you an exception to it. Nepotism can be pretty rough on a team's morale.

mewziq 3y ago
Programmers are the least capable engineers but the most cocksure and entitled Am an EE and I cannot stand the CS people at work. Oh you wrapped well known math in machine syntax sugar, none of which you invented, or defined? High 5, edgelord.
saghm 3y ago
Yeah, if I were someone working at a company having gone through the "normal" hiring process and then someone new joined my team and I found out they didn't have to go through it because they thought it was a waste of time and they were friends with the founder, that would feel pretty shitty.
- em-bee 3y ago
  it depends on their previous relationship. if they have worked together before then the test should be redundant. so why should i feel bothered that they didn't have to do a test?
  - saintfire 3y ago
    If the founder is not really involved with the hiring team then you are essentially going over them without them having any idea how you work. While I know what you're saying that the founder is vouching for your experience, its still going to cause friction, I think. Especially, again, to all the people that fought for the job.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      sure, i am thinking of cases where the founder is still involved with hiring, and especially more so, where the founder is the lead developer and still coding. i agree with you that once the company is large enough that the founder is no longer involved with hiring decisions then they should not just go over the hiring team. more specifically, as in this article: https://www.cio.com/article/236189/5-reasons-ceos-should-be-involved-in-hiring-decisions.html https://www.cio.com/article/236189/5-reasons-ceos-should-be-... i am talking about smaller companies that don't yet have senior management and HR teams
GandalfTheWhite 3y ago
If I was another employee or applicant, I would be legitimately upset if someone didn't have to jump through the same hoops that I did simply because he knew the boss.
- Solvency 3y ago
  That's insane. My CEO is 60 years old and has built and sold 4 different companies before this. His network of former colleagues is deep. It would be childish for me to believe all of the potential people from his former working relationships should be beholden to the exact same homework assignments as someone who is a complete stranger.

citizenpaul 3y ago

Did you ask them if they were advised by HR/legal to do these tests to everyone to avoid possible future discrimination lawsuits?

neilv 3y ago

> So anyhow, this guy who I’d worked alongside for years, who’d seen plenty of my code and wanted me to join his company, was going to make me do this homework to get an offer. Had your friend delegated the engineering hiring decisions/process to someone else, and was trying not to step on their toes? Or friend had instituted the process, and didn't think it would go well with the other people, if you looked like a nepotism hire who bypassed the process? Or friend was trying to put you in your employee place (where you had to meet his process), or otherwise was getting a bit full of himself, or a bit sleep-deprived and nutty?

robertlagrant 3y ago
> Or friend was trying to put you in your employee place (where you had to meet his process), or otherwise was getting a bit full of himself, or a bit sleep-deprived and nutty? This would be a strange take. CEO shouldn't be letting people in on the nod. If hiring is someone else's job, CEO shouldn't be overriding. At best suggesting candidates but saying that it's totally the hiring manager's call. If a candidate didn't pass a hiring process because they didn't put effort in as they felt they should get the job due to connections, I would agree with the company's decision.
- machomaster 3y ago
  The purpose of a hiring process (as in take home assignment) is to see that the person is competent to do the job. It was already established that he was. So following a formal process is a stupid waste of time (on both ends) that has nothing to do with strengthening the company and is simply an unnecessary ego trip. The company disqualified itself.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    How was it established?
    - wifipunk 3y ago
      They mean it was established by the CEO's experience with him as an engineer. To the company it was never, and as high a recommendation as the CEO would be; most people would agree they did the right thing. Unless you're hired before a hiring manager or whomever is doing the hiring you should follow the process. If you treat it like a joke because you feel entitled by your connections then be willing to accept the outcome.

asjir 3y ago

Was it 10, 100 employees at the time?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

GandalfTheWhite 3y ago

I can see your perspective, and it would be reasonable for them to say, "I already know this guy's work. He doesn't have to do the take-home.", which is not like saying, "I already know this guy from [irrelevant source]." I would do this, and have before. You also could have just smiled and nodded and actually done a good job to demonstrate your skills. It looks to me like you pulled your punches.