3 ms·

>There is however one last hurdle — a written test in the form of Fizzbuzz. A "last hurdle"? Shouldn't it be the first hurdle? I thought the point of using F

by jasode 12y ago

>There is however one last hurdle — a written test in the form of Fizzbuzz. A "last hurdle"? Shouldn't it be the first hurdle? I thought the point of using FizzBuzz in its proper context was to be a quick filter to weed out the majority of candidates. That way, you avoid wasting interview time with them.

Alupis 12y ago
Not necessarily... you can ask for code samples up front, then later in the interview see if the candidate is actually capable of living up to the expectations set by the code samples.
eli 12y ago
I don't like making job applicants do work -- even something as simple as fizzbuzz -- if it's unlikely I'm going to hire them. Just seems unfair. Also, if I'm giving someone a test, I'd prefer they work on it in front of me, which means it won't be the first screen. And finally, I don't think struggling on FizzBuzz necessarily means "No Hire." (I actually don't really give these sort of tests at all anymore. Didn't seem that useful in practice.)
- jasode 12y ago
  > -- if it's unlikely I'm going to hire them. But how do you get to the "unlikely" determination? Do you want to get a ballpark reading on "unlikely" within the first 10 minutes of the interview or at the very end after investing an hour? I'm not suggesting that FizzBuzz is the be-all-end-all but for the folks who already do find useful as a low-investment bs filter, it makes the most sense to use it at the beginning of the process and not at the end. Using it as a "last hurdle" makes no sense if you have a stack of resumes to plow through. If you have prior assumptions that 90% of those candidates are not competent at programming, what's the logic in using FizzBuzz as the last step? You want to identify the 10% as quickly as possible before investing too much extended interview time.
  - eli 12y ago
    Yup, you're probably right. If you're at the end of the process and on the cusp of hiring someone to write code but you're not sure whether they can write simple code then there's probably something wrong with your process.
  - dllthomas 12y ago
    "But how do you get to the "unlikely" determination?" M positions, N > 2*M candidates.
- watwut 12y ago
  I do not think fizzbuzz counts as work.
  - emerongi 12y ago
    It's like asking "Have you ever written code?" in a different way.
apetresc 12y ago
Everyone starts out thinking that, especially when interviewing juniors. "I'll use FizzBuzz to weed out the 5% who are just outright lying about having programmed ever before in their lives, and after they bang it out in 30 seconds, we can move on to something interesting!" Ten interviews later, you're just praying that SOMEONE will please just pass the FizzBuzz so you can hire them on the spot and go drink vodka to forget the entire experience. It's really sad.

by jasode 12y ago

Alupis 12y ago

Not necessarily... you can ask for code samples up front, then later in the interview see if the candidate is actually capable of living up to the expectations set by the code samples.

eli 12y ago

I don't like making job applicants do work -- even something as simple as fizzbuzz -- if it's unlikely I'm going to hire them. Just seems unfair. Also, if I'm giving someone a test, I'd prefer they work on it in front of me, which means it won't be the first screen. And finally, I don't think struggling on FizzBuzz necessarily means "No Hire." (I actually don't really give these sort of tests at all anymore. Didn't seem that useful in practice.)

jasode 12y ago
> -- if it's unlikely I'm going to hire them. But how do you get to the "unlikely" determination? Do you want to get a ballpark reading on "unlikely" within the first 10 minutes of the interview or at the very end after investing an hour? I'm not suggesting that FizzBuzz is the be-all-end-all but for the folks who already do find useful as a low-investment bs filter, it makes the most sense to use it at the beginning of the process and not at the end. Using it as a "last hurdle" makes no sense if you have a stack of resumes to plow through. If you have prior assumptions that 90% of those candidates are not competent at programming, what's the logic in using FizzBuzz as the last step? You want to identify the 10% as quickly as possible before investing too much extended interview time.
- eli 12y ago
  Yup, you're probably right. If you're at the end of the process and on the cusp of hiring someone to write code but you're not sure whether they can write simple code then there's probably something wrong with your process.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  "But how do you get to the "unlikely" determination?" M positions, N > 2*M candidates.
watwut 12y ago
I do not think fizzbuzz counts as work.
- emerongi 12y ago
  It's like asking "Have you ever written code?" in a different way.

apetresc 12y ago

Everyone starts out thinking that, especially when interviewing juniors. "I'll use FizzBuzz to weed out the 5% who are just outright lying about having programmed ever before in their lives, and after they bang it out in 30 seconds, we can move on to something interesting!" Ten interviews later, you're just praying that SOMEONE will please just pass the FizzBuzz so you can hire them on the spot and go drink vodka to forget the entire experience. It's really sad.