A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires • Hacker News Board

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#421

Post by RandomOpinion » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:10 PM UTC

taneq wrote: post #111

usloth_wandows wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can't code under pressure, you aren't a very competent programmer. Real world projects come with high pressure scenarios for software engineers. Code monkeys may be able to get away with low pressure, minimally impactful projects.

You're getting hammered for this, but for some jobs you're absolutely right. If you can't handle being put on the spot for a simple interview question, how are you going to go when a production line is down and it's costing your client $100k/hr, and the foreman's standing looking over your shoulder wanting to know when it'll be working? Not all jobs give you all the time in the world on a test server without interrup…

That's a terrible analogy. In a production crisis, you have full knowledge of and access to the system being diagnosed, have all your standard tools and information sources available to you, and are able to enlist your co-workers to aid you. Been there, done that and it's's nothing like a interview whiteboarding session.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#422

Post by rhombocombus » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:16 PM UTC

rms_returns wrote: post #397

yesiamyourdad wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of that really depends on the problem and the language. I program Java full time, yet I'd be useless with vi. I lean heavily on the IDE. I've done this a long time and I firmly believe that I should use the best tools available, not just a text editor or a TEXTAREA, even with syntax highlighting. Having suffered through a couple code interviews in Java, I now pick Python when allowed to pick a language. It seems…

Just out of curiosity, between Eclipse and Netbeans which IDE do you prefer for Java and why?

I prefer IntelliJ, with Eclipse a distant second (I know I'm not the comment author, but I spend 40+ hours a week slanging Java)

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#423

Post by wallunit » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:17 PM UTC

I like that approach, and we tried doing something like that in the past, but here is why it didn't work for us, unfortunately:

We work remotely, so is our hiring process. While it would be possible to give a programming task to a candidate, we won't have any control over whether they did it themselves, or how much time they actually spend on it. Well, the former is less of a problem, once you discuss the solution you see pretty quickly whether they did it themselves and understand how their solution works. However, candidates that want the job will try hard to do as best as possible, so some candidates that you give a 2h task to, tend to spend much more time on it. Others might not have as much time to spend on the task, since they usually still have a full-time job. So the results are not comparable.

Besides that, I find it quite difficult to find a task that can be done in 2h, but gives a sufficient insight of their skills, however you cannot expect somebody to take on a more elaborate task, whether paid or not, because most candidates are in a full-time job when they apply.

Also, this might be different in the US, but here in Germany, if the candidate isn't a freelancer/contractor at the moment, but permanently hired by an other company (this is normal), there is no way to pay them officially.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#424

Post by NLips » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:21 PM UTC

sundvor wrote: post #353

tthbalazs wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey! You might be interested in a solution that uses less blocks (i would be). I might have been lucky, took me 2-3 minutes to find this. https://blockly-games.appspot.com/maze?level=10#taj4p4 Does anyone know of a better one? Edit: just as i posted this i saw that you dont even need the first "Move Forward", so it is 10 lines total with 4 blocks left

Had another look before I saw your comment, down to 3 blocks left now (12 lines). Thought my previous one was a bit messy, much better now, not sure if it can be optimised any further. Will check your link next. :) EDIT: Nice. I was doing it slightly different to yours, https://blockly-games.appspot.com/maze?level=10#foif9x , two if statements instead would have fixed that, and the pattern becomes perfectly clear. Ch…

5 blocks left (using 8 lines): https://blockly-games.appspot.com/maze?level=10#9zdu9f

But that's code bingo - fewer lines, but less efficient for the mouse.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#425

Post by nilkn » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

silverbax88 wrote: post #409

clifanatic wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What 2 hour project can you assign that would let the candidate go into enough depth for you to judge their code, design decisions, architecture skills? Well, the movie project suggested in the article was a pretty reasonable one.

If you write that in 2 hours, honestly I can't see that being code I'd hire someone for. You'd have to hack together garbage code and you'd look like someone who threw things together without thinking.

Alternatively, with that time limit it's just going to select for candidates who've been churning out Django/Rails/etc. webpages recently and have all the details committed to memory.

That feels like premature optimization to me. I can see how it'd find generally good web developers, but I can also see how it'd produce just as many false negatives as Google's interviews do. So is it really that much of a step forward?

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#426

Post by mkoryak » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

zimpenfish wrote: post #394

wayn3 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only honest answer to this question is "i have no favourite four letter word". but you cant say that because idiot hiring managers who ask idiot questions would insist that you do. sorry, but if you ask shit questions, dont expect non-shit candidates.

Another honest answer would be "I thought I was applying for a development job, not a place in kindergarten. Good day, sir."

and this is good, because I wouldn't want to hire someone without any sense of humor

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#427

Post by lolsal » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

CSMastermind wrote: post #337

There's no chance I would consider a job that required me to do this.

Why not? I find your perspective interesting because I much prefer this style of interview.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#428

Post by mkoryak » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

erikb wrote: post #338

mkoryak wrote: post #334

I a single non tech question that is a very good heuristic for hire/no hire. What is your favorite 4 letter word. I usually ask at the beginning of interview and expect an answer at the end. Answers like fuck and shit === no hire. The other ones tell you a lot about the person

"four" So, what does it tell you?

nothing :)

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#429

Post by mkoryak » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:33 PM UTC

adtac wrote: post #340

mkoryak wrote: post #334

I a single non tech question that is a very good heuristic for hire/no hire. What is your favorite 4 letter word. I usually ask at the beginning of interview and expect an answer at the end. Answers like fuck and shit === no hire. The other ones tell you a lot about the person

I'm sorry, but how does this actually help you decide whether to hire or not hire a person? For example, if I reply "hire", would that impact my application positively or negatively?

the question is kind of a joke. If you reply 'hire' it would tell me that you are ok with answering a joke question and not flipping out like some other replies did.

If you get all pissed off that I asked you such a question, perhaps I should not hire you since you will get pissed off at silly things that happen at work.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#430

Post by dgudkov » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:33 PM UTC

redwards510 wrote: post #14

lacampbell wrote: post #11

I wish more companies would give example problems to solve in your own time. I did one for a fairly large Australian company, and they rejected it. By the time they got round to letting me know (very long turn around time) I had already found other employment. But still, their reasons for rejecting my solution - the output was not formatted to their liking, and they didn't seem to know what an anonymous function was…

I don't mind homework, but companies need to start specifying their salary range up front. I've been having a lot of time wasted lately by getting through Tech Interview #1 or Homework #1, only to find out their max salary is laughable for San Francisco. "You should just find that out upfront" I hear you saying. Well that is not always possible. Recruiters either don't know the range, or lie about not knowing, or you…

Alternatively, you can specify your expectations up front. It doesn't have to be an exact number, just a hint -- e.g. "No talk if the salary isn't well north of 100K".