4 ms·
There is that danger of hiring people who turn a simple problem into an intellectual exercise, wasting everyone's time. Also, it's very hard to figure out duri
by renegade-otter 2y ago
There is that danger of hiring people who turn a simple problem into an intellectual exercise, wasting everyone's time.
Also, it's very hard to figure out during interviews if the person is "smarter". What does that mean? They can solve more Leetcode problems?
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago> Also, it's very hard to figure out during interviews if the person is "smarter". What does that mean? They can solve more Leetcode problems? Not at all. "Smarter" and "spent enough time grinding leetcode" are almost entirely orthogonal. Trying to measure "smarter" by leetcode is even more misguided than trying to measure "good candidate" by leetcode. I've interviewed a fair number of people. During the interview, we ask them questions, trying to figure out what they know. With this one candidate, though, halfway through the interview we changed - we started asking questions because we wanted to learn things.
- NBJack 2y agoI think they were being sarcastic. But it's a bit challenging to conclusively measure someone's level of "smartness", especially with the usual time constraints of most hiring processes. More importantly, it also depends on what "smart" means to you, the company, etc.
- maeil 2y agoYou can definitely test things such as openness to new ideas and proneness to certain biases, which tend to be fantastic indicators. Probably not yet in an automated, 200 applicants per day way. Though I can see LLMs changing this.
- pixelrevision 2y agoAnd unfortunately “productive” needs to be part of the package. I have worked with some incredibly smart people that I really respected who had a very hard time getting anything done.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]