3 ms·

Is there a Spolsky Complex over at Fog Creek? :) Come on, guys - there isn't that much to say about the software process that haven't been said already. A short

by nir 17y ago

Is there a Spolsky Complex over at Fog Creek? :) Come on, guys - there isn't that much to say about the software process that haven't been said already. A short post with some code is way better than another discussion of "how to hire people". More _why, less Yegge. (Anyway, can anyone point to a company that truly figured out hiring? From what I've seen, it's mostly down to decision makers having good people instincts. Resumes, references, cover letters etc only get you so far. They aren't even that useful as filters, since they often leave out good candidates as well as poor ones.)

raganwald 17y ago
"Can anyone point to a company that truly figured out hiring? From what I've seen, it's mostly down to decision makers having good people instincts." Conjecture for discussion: This is true of almost all aspects of running a successful software development group: Hiring, Project management, Architecture, UI Design... Nobody seems to have "figured it out" to the point where you can write out an objective, repeatable process. It almost always comes down to having people with good "instincts" (i.e. They make good decisions) in positions where (a) they can make decisions, and (b) the team acts on those decisions without obstructing them or screwing them up.
- nir 17y ago
  Good point. Personally, I think that articles describing how you do X (and why) - assuming the writer has some history of successfully doing X - are more valuable than articles that try to define how X should be done. And even more valuable are articles about an actual thing you've done, and how you went about it. More show, less tell.
HeyLaughingBoy 17y ago
From what I've seen, it's mostly down to decision makers having good people instincts I would argue that that is a sign that it's been figured out. Putting candidates before interviewers with good people skills is an excellent filter. Interviewer training definitely helps (at least it helped me get better at conducting interviews and seeing past the happy face candidates put on), but good instincts are a powerful tool.

by nir 17y ago

raganwald 17y ago

"Can anyone point to a company that truly figured out hiring? From what I've seen, it's mostly down to decision makers having good people instincts." Conjecture for discussion: This is true of almost all aspects of running a successful software development group: Hiring, Project management, Architecture, UI Design... Nobody seems to have "figured it out" to the point where you can write out an objective, repeatable process. It almost always comes down to having people with good "instincts" (i.e. They make good decisions) in positions where (a) they can make decisions, and (b) the team acts on those decisions without obstructing them or screwing them up.

nir 17y ago
Good point. Personally, I think that articles describing how you do X (and why) - assuming the writer has some history of successfully doing X - are more valuable than articles that try to define how X should be done. And even more valuable are articles about an actual thing you've done, and how you went about it. More show, less tell.

HeyLaughingBoy 17y ago

From what I've seen, it's mostly down to decision makers having good people instincts I would argue that that is a sign that it's been figured out. Putting candidates before interviewers with good people skills is an excellent filter. Interviewer training definitely helps (at least it helped me get better at conducting interviews and seeing past the happy face candidates put on), but good instincts are a powerful tool.