2 ms·

Sure, the work is chaotic. But why would the interview process need to be chaotic? You want to get the best signals of ability that you can, and one thing you c

Sure, the work is chaotic. But why would the interview process need to be chaotic? You want to get the best signals of ability that you can, and one thing you can do to help that is to make sure that you’ve given an assignment that will be evaluated consistently on your end and understood uniformly by the participants

lmm 1y ago
> Sure, the work is chaotic. But why would the interview process need to be chaotic? Because the interview is meant to measure how well someone would perform on the work? > You want to get the best signals of ability that you can, and one thing you can do to help that is to make sure that you’ve given an assignment that will be evaluated consistently on your end and understood uniformly by the participants Well sure, all else being equal, but if the cost of consistency is an assignment that doesn't reflect the actual work environment then that may outweigh the benefit.
- parpfish 1y ago
  But why conflate “technical skill assessment” and “ambiguity handling” into one big stressful test? Doing two small tests toy can measure each skill independently A clear coding test to get technical skill and then some in person requirements gathering exercise or something to measure ambiguity handling. You’ll get better insight into their abilities with less effort for the interviewee AND the interviewer (if the startup is really that chaotic, do you really think they are doing a careful code review on a zillion different bespoke takehomes?)
  - lmm 1y ago
    > But why conflate “technical skill assessment” and “ambiguity handling” into one big stressful test? Because the combination is what matters for the hiring decision, and a single test is a lot easier for everyone than two tests. > You’ll get better insight into their abilities with less effort for the interviewee AND the interviewer Disagree. It would always end up being approximately twice as much effort for both.

lmm 1y ago

> Sure, the work is chaotic. But why would the interview process need to be chaotic? Because the interview is meant to measure how well someone would perform on the work? > You want to get the best signals of ability that you can, and one thing you can do to help that is to make sure that you’ve given an assignment that will be evaluated consistently on your end and understood uniformly by the participants Well sure, all else being equal, but if the cost of consistency is an assignment that doesn't reflect the actual work environment then that may outweigh the benefit.

parpfish 1y ago
But why conflate “technical skill assessment” and “ambiguity handling” into one big stressful test? Doing two small tests toy can measure each skill independently A clear coding test to get technical skill and then some in person requirements gathering exercise or something to measure ambiguity handling. You’ll get better insight into their abilities with less effort for the interviewee AND the interviewer (if the startup is really that chaotic, do you really think they are doing a careful code review on a zillion different bespoke takehomes?)
- lmm 1y ago
  > But why conflate “technical skill assessment” and “ambiguity handling” into one big stressful test? Because the combination is what matters for the hiring decision, and a single test is a lot easier for everyone than two tests. > You’ll get better insight into their abilities with less effort for the interviewee AND the interviewer Disagree. It would always end up being approximately twice as much effort for both.