Why Mark Suster is wrong about not hiring job hoppers • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Mark Suster is wrong about not hiring job hoppers

#81

Post by ivenkys » Mon, Apr 26, 2010, 8:09 AM UTC

j_baker wrote: post #55

ivenkys wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True , but then let the code talk , in this day and age of github and other social coding sites - show them what you got and if the employer has any sense he will hire you.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. Having good code on github will get you an interview, but it won't make up for a bad one.

If an employer overlooks good code and instead places more emphasis on an amorphous process like an interview which has plenty of false-negatives and positives , then i would argue against working for such an employer.

They have a broken recruitment process.

Re: Why Mark Suster is wrong about not hiring job hoppers

#82

Post by dagw » Mon, Apr 26, 2010, 9:09 AM UTC

ivenkys wrote: post #81

j_baker wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. Having good code on github will get you an interview, but it won't make up for a bad one.

If an employer overlooks good code and instead places more emphasis on an amorphous process like an interview which has plenty of false-negatives and positives , then i would argue against working for such an employer. They have a broken recruitment process.

I know a few people whom I consider amazing programmers, but that I'd never hire and feel very dubious to have as colleagues due to their personality and how they act. There are very few jobs (if any) where all that counts is the quality of what you put up on github.

Re: Why Mark Suster is wrong about not hiring job hoppers

#83

Post by ivenkys » Mon, Apr 26, 2010, 10:29 AM UTC

dagw wrote: post #82

ivenkys wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an employer overlooks good code and instead places more emphasis on an amorphous process like an interview which has plenty of false-negatives and positives , then i would argue against working for such an employer. They have a broken recruitment process.

I know a few people whom I consider amazing programmers, but that I'd never hire and feel very dubious to have as colleagues due to their personality and how they act. There are very few jobs (if any) where all that counts is the quality of what you put up on github.

Fair enough, but i never said hire programmers based "only" on their code in github. The assumption here is that certain programmers do not do "technical" interviews well and they can therefore point to their code as proof of their technical competency. If their personality is broken well - that's a completely different problem and i don't know the solution to it. Either way, i think this particular strain of discussion is in someways orthogonal to the main point of the article.

Re: Why Mark Suster is wrong about not hiring job hoppers

#84

Post by varjag » Mon, Apr 26, 2010, 11:39 AM UTC

gigantosaurus wrote: post #66

mattm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it still be worth it to be with a great girl for only a few months?

I've heard similar advice about hiring people who are obviously over-qualified and will probably leave in 6 months. You have to use them not as workers, but as trainers and inspiration beacons for the rest of the team.

The beacon that leaves after a few months? I don't know what kind of inspiration that would provide.

Re: Why Mark Suster is wrong about not hiring job hoppers

#85

Post by alain94040 » Mon, Apr 26, 2010, 3:51 PM UTC

hxa7241 wrote: post #22

Salary is priced by the market, and that requires regular testing. Saying you don't want to hire regular job-changers is saying you don't want a functioning market. That, of course, is just what one would expect from companies who don't want to pay people what they are worth. Talk of 'loyalty' is effectively propaganda.

But if you test your market value too often, you may be tempted to perform incremental changes, that will lead you to a local maximum, rather than find the global maximum

Why? Because by job hopping, you'll find the company willing to pay the most for your current skills, but you'll forgo promotions that would allow you access to even higher-paying jobs.