Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

hxngsun.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 96 posts

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#71

Post by sidibe »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #13
alexandercrohde wrote: post #11

Most people hate them when they get rejected, consider them fair when they pass. Like anything, they are mostly subjective and very gameable (compare it to getting accepted at a college) It's not remotely scientifically-objective, but most things in life aren't. I'd liken it more to dating. Both parties are evaluating each other on innumerable criteria through their own subjective lenses, and trying to reduce it a sc…

There are real results based on how successful someone is on a job. Being dismissive that there is a problem because you think people only complain when they don't get a job is simplistic and incredibly naive. If an interview process is completely detached from what it takes to succeed at a job, what good is it?

What makes you say it's completely detached from what it takes to do the job? The only evidence that I see cited often is some study by Google that says success in the interviews didn't predict performance, but Google continues to use the same model for interviewing. I would think an organization that big would have people devoted to improving their interviews and would change it if they thought it had bad outcomes.

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#72

Post by AndrewKemendo »

tchaffee wrote: post #69
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #62

There is no right answer to this. Every company is different, so there is no right way to do software interviews. Enterprise SaaS, Consumer Social and ML API companies will all have different working environments. Add on to that options of remote vs on-prem, CI/CD vs TDD, customer integration requirements, staff numbers, perks etc... and you have completely different needs for workers and teams. A team earns their hi…

> there is no right way to do software interviews. In the context you presented this in, I agree with you. However, interviewing is a skill that must be learned or you are going to make loads of beginner mistakes. In that sense there are many right things you should be doing in an interview and whatever your company style is, you're going to want to use at least some of those best practices in your interviews if you…

Isn't this true for anything though? More experience = better (on average).

In theory there is an optima between a new hires ideal workplace and the hiring company's style of work. As with most things it's about knowing yourself and identifying in others if there is a match.

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#73

Post by pbourke »

grepthisab wrote: post #50

I personally like the way we currently do software interviews. I got a nearly perfect SAT/GMAT through rote preparation (despite not doing so well in school generally), and brought this skill to bear on software engineering interviews. As such, I’ve had job offers at some of the best companies in the world, something my pedigree otherwise wouldn’t have allowed. I’m not able to get a job at McKinsey or BCG, no matter…

> I get that many people, especially seniors, are annoyed by the general software engineering process because they feel entitled to certain positions

I’m annoyed by the process - as both interviewer and interviewee - because I don’t think that it has much to do with the actual work.

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#74

Post by Dibes »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #37
rootusrootus wrote: post #14

I would fail utterly at a real coding interview. I've been out of school too long for that crap. And also, my tolerance for it has dropped as well. But, I'm now a dev manager so I get to sit on the other side. I've been doing interviews in the last week for a dev position and I don't subject candidates to coding. I talk with them about what they work on, one of my senior devs sits in and goes even deeper -- learning…

Honest? Smart? Positive attitude? Fun to work with? Willing to learn new stuff? Learn new stuff on your own because you like coding? Ok. We're done. Now check references. We'll follow that up with an audition, show up on a Saturday and pair up with team members for some random hacking, see how you handle working closely with people on a problem.

I actually love the idea of teaming up with some people to do some random hacking. That sounds like a super fun interview! But it also sounds really time-consuming for the team members as well as the candidate, especially if the time goes flat

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#75

Post by asdsa5325 »

slap_shot wrote: post #7

We absolutely should. Here's what I'm doing to help change it: I'm launching a new venture that will try to help connect great engineers with great companies. Companies with great teams, competitive benefits, and the belief that engineers shouldn't have to go through bullshit interview practices and shouldn't have to study 150 hours for a round of interviews. The flow is pretty simple: a quick Skype/Hang out call to…

This is a good idea, please make it happen (and allow more locations!)

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#76

Post by TrinaryWorksToo »

slap_shot wrote: post #53
walshemj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this is just minor tweaks (not that anonymity is not a bad idea per say) to the already despised status quo. How is this going to broaden the application pool to include neurodiverse candidates and not just pander to the credentialist notion that rote leaning to get a piece of paper makes you the best candidate.

Can you help me understand how I can help "broaden the application pool to include neurodiverse candidates?" We're only in private beta now, but the goal is that when we launch, it will be open for any person to apply to. I don't see our model ever being some that "panders to the credentialist notion that rote leaning to get a piece of paper makes you the best candidate." It's the exact opposite, really.

I'm on the autism spectrum, and I like hearing about your approach.

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#77

Post by shady-lady »

slap_shot wrote: post #32
arenaninja wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair to OP, I think there's ways to structure throwaway projects in such a way that it contains flaws and they're useless to a real company but complex enough to gauge experience/familiarity, etc. I don't think GitHub would be optimal since then people could clone these throwaway projects and create brain dumps.

We actually pay contracted engineers (up $100/hr) to write these projects. They're usually recreations of interesting problems have had to implement or work on in their careers. Some are just forks of open source projects. We don't turn around an use the code the candidate wrote. If you consider the cost to use to write the project AND the cost to have it reviewed N number of times, we'd be overpaying drastically for…

Why don't you get the companies who are hiring to have their engineers setup & write some code?

Code reviews worth both ways.

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#78

Post by prater »

tchaffee wrote: post #46
prater wrote: post #30

I've been through and used several different styles of interview and the one that stands out as being "the best" at predicting whether a person will fit on the team is just to bring them in and work with them for a day on your actual product 1) You don't do problems you've already solved that they have to come up with same answer to. 2) You don't do algorithm / problem testing that they're never going to use on the j…

I'm assuming you pay a fair rate for that day of work?

Of course.

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#79

Post by ropeadopepope »

slap_shot wrote: post #57
arenaninja wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like that you compensate candidates for their time. I can't think of anyone else who follows that model presently, so thank you for keeping in mind being fair to prospective hires. Are you all SF-only?

We're just in SF/NYC right now, but this model travels well. Hopefully you'll see us a in a lot more places by the end of the year.

Do any of those SF/NYC companies hire remote employees?

Re: Ask HN: Should we change the way we do software interviews? What's stopping us?

#80

Post by rootusrootus »

chrisseaton wrote: post #33
rootusrootus wrote: post #14

I would fail utterly at a real coding interview. I've been out of school too long for that crap. And also, my tolerance for it has dropped as well. But, I'm now a dev manager so I get to sit on the other side. I've been doing interviews in the last week for a dev position and I don't subject candidates to coding. I talk with them about what they work on, one of my senior devs sits in and goes even deeper -- learning…

I encounter people who can make pleasant conversation about programming all day... but literally can’t seem to actually program in practice. Do you see that? How does your interview check for that?

I have not yet run into anyone who could deep-dive into the details of what they're working on and talk about the good, bad, and ugly, who turned out to be incapable of coding. Maybe I've been lucky, but I think it's pretty hard to fake that level of knowledge.

For remote developers I do deviate slightly and I actually ask them to do a little coding, but that's because it's always someone in Hyderabad and the cultural differences make a deep-dive conversation with body language a lot harder to pull off. So I ask them to whip up a demo program that scores a game of Bowling, take as long as necessary, and bring the results to the interview and show me what they did. Not much but it works (and scoring a bowling game is actually not a bad test -- not as trivial as it sounds, but doesn't take a whole evening of work just for an interview).

Post reply on HN