You can’t fix diversity in tech without fixing the technical interview

Post by pnathan » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 9:23 PM UTC

drakenot wrote: post #34

ams6110 wrote: post #9

I've been in software tech for nearly 30 years. Never had a "technical" interview, puzzle solving, or anything like that. I would not take a job that screened candidates that way. If references and credentials and track record aren't enough, I would look elsewhere.

Flip side -- I view it as a strong negative if a company has what I consider a weak interview or vetting process. The interview doesn't have to be all whiteboard coding but I want to at least feel like the person got some grasp of my technical ability. If the entire thing is basically a "personality interview" I start to think that it is very possible technically weak people may have been able to schmooze their way i…

Post by burkaman » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 9:25 PM UTC

treehau5 wrote: post #35

burkaman wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the next couple sentences explain it well: > It takes a lot of interviews to get used to the process and the format and to understand that the stuff you do in technical interviews isn’t actually the stuff you do at work every day. And it takes people in your social circle all going through the same experience, screwing up interviews here and there, and getting back on the horse to realize that poor performanc…

But this can be literally true for anyone. I tried re-reading it again and again and I am not seeing the distinction. Different people have different reactions to things. In other fields, it's not uncommon for people to submit resumes to 10, 15, even 20 firms and go through 5 to 10 interviews before landing their first "real" job. I think we forget how good we have it in tech relative to the rest of the economy. It's…

Post by briholt » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 9:26 PM UTC

Post by stanleydrew » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 9:30 PM UTC

drakenot wrote: post #34

ams6110 wrote: post #9

I've been in software tech for nearly 30 years. Never had a "technical" interview, puzzle solving, or anything like that. I would not take a job that screened candidates that way. If references and credentials and track record aren't enough, I would look elsewhere.

Flip side -- I view it as a strong negative if a company has what I consider a weak interview or vetting process. The interview doesn't have to be all whiteboard coding but I want to at least feel like the person got some grasp of my technical ability. If the entire thing is basically a "personality interview" I start to think that it is very possible technically weak people may have been able to schmooze their way i…

Post by elgenie » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 9:31 PM UTC

pj_mukh wrote: post #31

mrkurt wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expanding the hiring pool is valuable to these companies. Many companies also feel like they'll perform better with a more diverse group of employees. I sure felt like that about my company. They probably _also_ feel like it's right. This is one of those social problems where both the business need and moral need match up. My guess is that people who want racial diversity want class diversity, diversity of thought, c…

This is mostly empirically provable [1]. Diverse teams come up with better ideas that apply to a larger swath of markets (an immediate payoff for companies). [1]: http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-...