3 ms·
I've seen two kinds of motivations: that for career climbing, and that of an engineer who enjoys making things. I personally prefer my engineers to have the sec
by crdb 12y ago
I've seen two kinds of motivations: that for career climbing, and that of an engineer who enjoys making things. I personally prefer my engineers to have the second.
I tried hiring the normal way (CV, white board) and had one candidate worth speaking to in over 200 applicants.
We decided to try something else. We stopped reading any cover letter or CV and wrote that in the job ad. We asked candidates to build a simplified version of what the job was about, taking about 4 hours, then to send us the code which we'd discuss with them over the phone at their convenience. Anybody whose code passed would be hired, and if people couldn't be bothered because they were already famous they could send us their libraries. Nobody took the Starcraft best of 7 option :(
Why we did this:
- having to write code eliminates those who can't, or who can't be bothered; not having complex unrelated hoops to jump through eliminated those who are good at career climbing;
- we replaced the hours candidates would normally spend dealing with HR or travelling to a site for something ("cultural fit") that overselects the polished anyway, with something people we want would enjoy doing (solving a problem, writing code);
- no pressure, access to your "external brain" (Google, your own libraries) unlike with a white board; allows for the anxious to pass, and those who outsource a lot of their knowledge to the machine (like me);
- you can tell a lot about how people will approach their job from the way they approach the small version of it; documentation, structure, abstraction levels, choice of libraries, and if you're wrong about the candidate's reasons you can always clear it up in the chat;
- it's fair because everybody has to tackle the same problem;
- no discrimination since it's all ability based: I took to Skype-text-chatting with candidates instead of voice calls mostly because I don't like talking on the phone. It was only when she sent us her passport scan for the contract that we realised one of our candidates was female. Another team member didn't have a CV; it's because he was just finishing high school, as we discovered when we talked to him, but his code was good enough, so he got the offer and skipped university.
I've never had to put out another job ad (not for myself anyway) because I have so many qualified candidates left over from that round, and from the team network. Surprisingly, we didn't get spammed; the requirement to post code seems to have been mostly understood and we only had a half dozen "dear Sir/Madam"s.
So I disagree with you, but YMMV. We were hiring for a small, distributed team solving relatively well known problems. Requirements are probably different at Google or Facebook.
- teen 12y agoI would never do a 4 hour project for an interview...
- crdb 12y ago150 people did... and most had pretty good jobs already. 40 on the first day! Think about it another way. How much time do you spend/waste when applying to a standard corporate job? I graduated at the height of the Lehman fallout. I really wanted to work in finance. I applied to over 200 companies and did a seemingly endless string of interviews. In one case, a fund interviewed me an incredible 17 times for an analyst position (about half of which were "technical" i.e. "here's a bunch of accounts, tell us what you think of the company"). In every occasion that led to an offer, I spent way more than 4 hours travelling, talking with HR, doing various rounds of interviewing with various team members, having "social" coffees with other same-level folks... hell just the automated screening tests, essays, forms for somewhere like Goldman Sachs would take a good couple of hours if you did them properly. I still know many experienced people for whom a job search during an economic downturn means sitting for months at home doing these stupid screening tests and perfecting their cover letter (after all, putting the wrong company name in your letter is enough to get you rejected, because of course you really, really want to work at this particular bank and none of the competitors even though the reputation, work and compensation are identical). I think a lot of more experienced people realised the trade-off and thought this was quite a positive signal on our part - at least based on the number of people who were willing to quit incredibly well paid jobs for our pretty average Asian retailer with no equity and a third of the pay. I had one prominent member of the open source community slam us publicly for "wasting people's time with free work" whilst one of his work colleagues was gleefully submitting his solution to the task...
- jghn 12y agoIf they're doing that in lieu of normal screening and interview panels this would likely be a time savings for the candidate