4 ms·

When I do interviews I like to ask candidates if they want to share anything interesting they've made, studied, worked on, or played with outside of their jobs.

When I do interviews I like to ask candidates if they want to share anything interesting they've made, studied, worked on, or played with outside of their jobs. I explain their answer can only help, not hurt, as a non-answer is not a negative. It's simply an opportunity to bring up something that wouldn't normally come up during the work-history driven interview. Very few candidates say they've done any programming outside of their jobs. At most, they share something like running Home Assistant on a Raspberry Pi and using Python to automate their house or something. Another common one is to hear about how they used an Arduino or Raspberry Pi to accomplish some small task. Very few people say they have side projects. Of those who do, when I ask for details most admit it never went far beyond the idea phase. So from what I can deduce, it's very uncommon for programmers to have true side projects that go beyond a couple git commits worth of code to solve some task, or an idea they had that they never followed up on.

mycall 1y ago
Side projects are less interesting as the number of decades you write software for a living increases. Of course, everyone is different here and use cases arise.
nomel 1y ago
I think this is a rude question to ask, and it would reflect negatively on you, the company, and the group dynamics, if I were asked it. It shows an unprofessional and inappropriate interest in things unrelated to work, and, from my experience, is a good indicator that the person will either micromanage, has poor work life balance, or is not socially fit to be a manager. I know that sounds super harsh, but you should seriously reconsider. You're going to scare people away. There's a power dynamic that you don't seem to be aware of, during the interview process. It's not your concern what they do with their free time, unless they present it to you, unprovoked. This is from someone who has interviewed hundreds of people. Besides all of that, it opens you up to litigation for discrimination, depending on the answer they give. I suggest talking with your HR department. Where I am now, questions about personal life are strictly prohibited, for that reason. edit: please note the "unprovoked". If people want to share the projects they do in their personal time, they will include it in their resume as a line item. I've seen it in probably 30% of the candidates. It means "ask me about these things". edit: better yet, just rephrase, so it's not a potentially uncomfortable probe into personal time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45543812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45543812
- Aurornis 1y ago
  > It shows an unprofessional and inappropriate interest in things unrelated to work, No, it's a chance for candidates to bring up relevant experience that might help their candidacy. The question isn't about things unrelated to work. The question is asking if they have any additional experience outside of work that might help us better understand their skills for their job application. Many people have relevant experience for the job that they gained outside of work. Asking about that is not only okay, it's a good thing. > and, from my experience, is a good indicator that the person will either micromanage, has poor work life balance, or is not socially fit to be a manager. Asking candidates if they have any extra experience to share is not an indicator of micromanaging. Jumping to completely unrelated conclusions and drawing extreme assumptions about people is not a good way to interpret a question like that. I explained that the question cannot have any negative value to the candidate. It's a chance to bring up extra things if they have them and we didn't cover them. Literally doing the candidate a favor, not being rude or micromanaging. > It also opens you up to litigation for discrimination, depending on the answer they give. I suggest talking with your HR department. Asking candidates to share their work-relevant experience does not invite discrimination lawsuits. How are you coming up with these interpretations? Legal was involved in reviewing our hiring processes, so no need for condescending lectures about getting HR involved.
  - nomel 1y ago
    > Asking candidates to share their work-relevant experience does not invite discrimination lawsuits. I suggest you talk to your HR department. This isn't my interpretation, it's that of our cooperate lawyers. If they say "I just had a kid, I spend time with them", is a good example. This should be obvious to you, which is further evidence you should not be asking these questions. edit: can't reply directly. No, that's not how it works. You being made aware of it, and you using that information is enough. Good luck!
    - Aurornis 1y ago
      > If they say "I just had a kid, I spend time with them", is a good example. Your understanding of these laws is flawed. A candidate volunteering information doesn't make the company liable for discrimination against them. It's a common misconception that if topics like having kids or being married comes up in an interview then the company is liable to be sued for discrimination. It should be obvious that a candidate can't entrap a company by injecting this information into the interview when it wasn't asked. Even if the interviewers do ask, a discrimination lawsuit has a much higher bar than the topic simply coming up in the interview. It has to be demonstrated that the information was used to discriminate against the applicant, not just that it was discussed. Your interpretation of my question is also flawed. I'm not asking "Tell me what you do in your free time." I'm asking them if they have anything outside of work that they'd like to share that would help their case. > I suggest you talk to your HR department. Please read my entire comment. The legal team reviewed our interview process and had no problems with it. I think maybe your HR department has tried extra hard to scare you away from subjects they want to avoid, which has led to a misunderstanding of how the law actually works. It's common for HR professionals to tell interviewers that there are "illegal questions" or that if a topic comes up at all then you're going to get sued for discrimination. In reality, the legal bar for these cases is much higher. HR professionals just want to scare interviewers away entirely and drive the point home. Asking candidates if they have an additional experience to share isn't an invitation for discrimination lawsuits. I suggest you open your mind a little bit and consider that some candidates may have more to offer than appears on the bullet points under each job on their resume.
_dain_ 1y ago
>a non-answer is not a negative I don't know how this can be true. Interviewing for a job is a zero-sum competition against the other candidates. If something isn't a positive, it has to be a negative.
conartist6 1y ago
It feels slightly disingenuous. Many engineers do their work with a sense of personal duty and pride. Should a drive for self-improvement be neglected because it didn't happen outside of work hours? For the years I had paid employment I'm very thankful that I didn't make programming my hobby in addition to being my work. For the last 5 years it's been both and I wouldn't wish that experience on anyone

mycall 1y ago

Side projects are less interesting as the number of decades you write software for a living increases. Of course, everyone is different here and use cases arise.

nomel 1y ago

I think this is a rude question to ask, and it would reflect negatively on you, the company, and the group dynamics, if I were asked it. It shows an unprofessional and inappropriate interest in things unrelated to work, and, from my experience, is a good indicator that the person will either micromanage, has poor work life balance, or is not socially fit to be a manager. I know that sounds super harsh, but you should seriously reconsider. You're going to scare people away. There's a power dynamic that you don't seem to be aware of, during the interview process. It's not your concern what they do with their free time, unless they present it to you, unprovoked. This is from someone who has interviewed hundreds of people. Besides all of that, it opens you up to litigation for discrimination, depending on the answer they give. I suggest talking with your HR department. Where I am now, questions about personal life are strictly prohibited, for that reason. edit: please note the "unprovoked". If people want to share the projects they do in their personal time, they will include it in their resume as a line item. I've seen it in probably 30% of the candidates. It means "ask me about these things". edit: better yet, just rephrase, so it's not a potentially uncomfortable probe into personal time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45543812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45543812

Aurornis 1y ago
> It shows an unprofessional and inappropriate interest in things unrelated to work, No, it's a chance for candidates to bring up relevant experience that might help their candidacy. The question isn't about things unrelated to work. The question is asking if they have any additional experience outside of work that might help us better understand their skills for their job application. Many people have relevant experience for the job that they gained outside of work. Asking about that is not only okay, it's a good thing. > and, from my experience, is a good indicator that the person will either micromanage, has poor work life balance, or is not socially fit to be a manager. Asking candidates if they have any extra experience to share is not an indicator of micromanaging. Jumping to completely unrelated conclusions and drawing extreme assumptions about people is not a good way to interpret a question like that. I explained that the question cannot have any negative value to the candidate. It's a chance to bring up extra things if they have them and we didn't cover them. Literally doing the candidate a favor, not being rude or micromanaging. > It also opens you up to litigation for discrimination, depending on the answer they give. I suggest talking with your HR department. Asking candidates to share their work-relevant experience does not invite discrimination lawsuits. How are you coming up with these interpretations? Legal was involved in reviewing our hiring processes, so no need for condescending lectures about getting HR involved.
- nomel 1y ago
  > Asking candidates to share their work-relevant experience does not invite discrimination lawsuits. I suggest you talk to your HR department. This isn't my interpretation, it's that of our cooperate lawyers. If they say "I just had a kid, I spend time with them", is a good example. This should be obvious to you, which is further evidence you should not be asking these questions. edit: can't reply directly. No, that's not how it works. You being made aware of it, and you using that information is enough. Good luck!
  - Aurornis 1y ago
    > If they say "I just had a kid, I spend time with them", is a good example. Your understanding of these laws is flawed. A candidate volunteering information doesn't make the company liable for discrimination against them. It's a common misconception that if topics like having kids or being married comes up in an interview then the company is liable to be sued for discrimination. It should be obvious that a candidate can't entrap a company by injecting this information into the interview when it wasn't asked. Even if the interviewers do ask, a discrimination lawsuit has a much higher bar than the topic simply coming up in the interview. It has to be demonstrated that the information was used to discriminate against the applicant, not just that it was discussed. Your interpretation of my question is also flawed. I'm not asking "Tell me what you do in your free time." I'm asking them if they have anything outside of work that they'd like to share that would help their case. > I suggest you talk to your HR department. Please read my entire comment. The legal team reviewed our interview process and had no problems with it. I think maybe your HR department has tried extra hard to scare you away from subjects they want to avoid, which has led to a misunderstanding of how the law actually works. It's common for HR professionals to tell interviewers that there are "illegal questions" or that if a topic comes up at all then you're going to get sued for discrimination. In reality, the legal bar for these cases is much higher. HR professionals just want to scare interviewers away entirely and drive the point home. Asking candidates if they have an additional experience to share isn't an invitation for discrimination lawsuits. I suggest you open your mind a little bit and consider that some candidates may have more to offer than appears on the bullet points under each job on their resume.

_dain_ 1y ago

>a non-answer is not a negative I don't know how this can be true. Interviewing for a job is a zero-sum competition against the other candidates. If something isn't a positive, it has to be a negative.

conartist6 1y ago

It feels slightly disingenuous. Many engineers do their work with a sense of personal duty and pride. Should a drive for self-improvement be neglected because it didn't happen outside of work hours? For the years I had paid employment I'm very thankful that I didn't make programming my hobby in addition to being my work. For the last 5 years it's been both and I wouldn't wish that experience on anyone