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

Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

keyvalues.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 370 posts

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#11

Post by toast0 »

bradenb wrote: post #2

VP of Engineering at Eaze, previously CTO at Getable and engineer at Yammer. No, not at all. Whiteboard interviews test one thing well: How well does a candidate code on a whiteboard. Engineers on my team never have to code on a whiteboard (whiteboards are really bad at running code), why would I make candidates do something that I don't ask the engineers already on my team to do? This comes close, but I think the re…

I guess it depends on the job, but for outage response, being able to understand a problem, and update or write new code in a reasonable amount of time is kind of a useful skill. Discussing it on a board with others can be useful, if the code isn't complex. Of course, that also depends on the environment; if you're in an environment can't actually push any code, even emergency fixes, quickly, then it doesn't help a lot.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#12

Post by pmiller2 »

recursive wrote: post #7
pmiller2 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Jotting down some code on a whiteboard” with a colleague is a much lower stress scenario than deriving and writing down, under a time limit, some DP algorithm you might not have used since college, and proving its correctness and run time to some stranger who may be barely out of college themselves.

Interviews are necessarily more stressful than typical work. That's not just a property of whiteboard coding.

More stressful, sure. For many people, whiteboard coding is disproportionately more stressful than typical work, and that’s the problem.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#13

Post by castlegloom »

It seems like there are two things at play - whiteboarding interviews vs. using whiteboards in your day-to-day job.

If the test is to see how well a person works in a whiteboarding interview to solve a problem, then it should be a simulation of collaboration, while trying to avoid the Clever Hans effect.

Otherwise your DP whiteboarding problems are worthless.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#14

Post by h4b4n3r0 »

Nay, unless the candidate wants the whiteboard. Even Google doesn't mandate whiteboard anymore: you can write your code on the provided Chromebook. Some people choose whiteboard, though, for reasons unknown. I think whiteboard (or a sheet of paper) is reasonable for what it gets used for IRL: for sketching out what you're going to do, by drawing or writing very high level description, but it sucks for everything else.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#15

Post by lfowles »

pmiller2 wrote: post #12
recursive wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interviews are necessarily more stressful than typical work. That's not just a property of whiteboard coding.

More stressful, sure. For many people, whiteboard coding is disproportionately more stressful than typical work, and that’s the problem.

One particular expectation when whiteboard coding for an interview is that there is little/no downtime, you must be making progress or talking about your thoughts. Incidentally, 50% of my thought process then becomes "How do I talk about what I'm thinking about? Oh no, I'm only thinking about talking about what I'm thinking about..."

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#16

Post by jriot »

teachrdan wrote: post #5
bradenb wrote: post #2

VP of Engineering at Eaze, previously CTO at Getable and engineer at Yammer. No, not at all. Whiteboard interviews test one thing well: How well does a candidate code on a whiteboard. Engineers on my team never have to code on a whiteboard (whiteboards are really bad at running code), why would I make candidates do something that I don't ask the engineers already on my team to do? This comes close, but I think the re…

There's some logic to that. It's the one of the same reasons we have high stakes exams in school: to show what the individual can do under pressure. In an interview setting you can't simulate what it's like to be at the end of a high-intensity sprint, but you can ask the candidate to answer a tough question on a whiteboard and (ideally) get a notion of how they work when the going gets tough.

As a former air traffic controller and now data scientist, nothing in this career field is ever done under any real pressure.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#18

Post by romaniv »

toast0 wrote: post #11
bradenb wrote: post #2

VP of Engineering at Eaze, previously CTO at Getable and engineer at Yammer. No, not at all. Whiteboard interviews test one thing well: How well does a candidate code on a whiteboard. Engineers on my team never have to code on a whiteboard (whiteboards are really bad at running code), why would I make candidates do something that I don't ask the engineers already on my team to do? This comes close, but I think the re…

I guess it depends on the job, but for outage response, being able to understand a problem, and update or write new code in a reasonable amount of time is kind of a useful skill. Discussing it on a board with others can be useful, if the code isn't complex. Of course, that also depends on the environment; if you're in an environment can't actually push any code, even emergency fixes, quickly, then it doesn't help a l…

Do you design clever search algorithms during outages?

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#19

Post by lfowles »

devy wrote: post #9

Serious question, if whiteboard interview aren't the best or helpful at all, what are the successful/useful alternatives for engineering interviews?

My favorite interviews have been those that had a small project as a screener and then proceeded to have you modify and/or explain decisions regarding the project at the in-person stage.
Post reply on HN