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

Hire people who aren’t proven

leonardofed.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 460 posts

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#101

Post by whiddershins »

snowwrestler wrote: post #29
maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

Most high end professional fields have some sort of certification process, the difficulty of which roughly corresponds to the level of damage a bad professional can do.

Doctors, lawyers, accountants, architects, and engineers can easily destroy or end lives in the course of their work and the certification process tends to weed out people who are in it for the money but not actually capable.

I really don’t think your average CS grad can be said to be filtered in the same way.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#102

Post by EnderMB »

alfredmuffin wrote: post #82
ravenstine wrote: post #34

Why would any company have do hire people and train them? Companies these days don't really come to a hault if they're in need of a few developers, and as the market is saturated, they can hold out indefinitely until they believe they have a "rockstar." According to my experience, a lot fewer companies than even a few years ago are in a hurry to talk to you despite them having a job posting and you having more experi…

> the market is saturated Unrelated to your point and this thread, but can someone share some data/evidence on this? (not that I am denying it)

I'd be interested in hard data too, mostly because it seems absolutely true across multiple stacks. In my own experience, junior development salaries have dropped in the last decade and the number of people that apply for roles has increased significantly, to the point where at my last employer we had hundreds of people apply for a .NET role, and not just local people either - people were willing to move for what was a fairly bog-standard role at a bog-standard agency.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#103

Post by amorphous »

I recommend "Why Employees Are Always a Bad Idea" by Chuck Blakeman. It describes how to build a company where everyone is a stakeholder and not a child that needs constanct watching and stupid rules in order to function. No titles, no working hours, unlimited vacation time, you hire the whole person (not just the BS smile at work part). You work together because you want to find and make meaning. No CVs and skills are far less important than personality and fit (skills can always be learned).

The book is the reason I'm building my own company because this is how I want to work and live (I used to work for a company like that, but unfortunately, due to personal circumstances the founder had to split and the company disappeared).

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#104

Post by busterarm »

wiradikusuma wrote: post #51
snowwrestler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

I don't think it's a good analogy. Good programmers (esp. the ones OP referring to) are usually curious, like to tinker. So it's a valid check whether they like hacking since young age (I'm not saying those who don't are not good, but those who do most likely are). Maybe a better analogy is an inventor (is this even a job?).

And one of the best hackers that I've ever met didn't even care or know anything about computers until his second year of university. And he's only two years out of school...

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#105

Post by freewilly1040 »

snowwrestler wrote: post #29
maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

While I agree with your point, the medical resident example is a poor one. Prospective medical _students_ are expected to basically devote their extra curricular free time to demonstrating their passion for medicine via volunteering, etc.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#106

Post by wafflesraccoon »

collyw wrote: post #41
maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

Cares about what though? Building simple,solid, maintainable software that does what it is supposed to? Or cares about chasing every new fad, has ten frameworks listed on their resume and is currently midway through the machine learning / blockchain hype? I care about the former, but plenty of people would see that as having little "passion". For example, I don't have any experience using NoSQL databases on my CV, be…

After programming professionally for several years now I'm always shocked to hear that people program for fun in their free time. Once I get home from work, the last thing I want to think about is writing software.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#107

Post by Xylakant »

namanyayg wrote: post #94
snowwrestler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

Doing software development in high school requires a computer (even a ~$400 that is shared with the family is sufficient), interest, and time (so one can spend hours required reading tutorials/watching videos). Basically, nothing too much out of the reach of your average teenager -- with the exception of interest/dedication to the art. Doctors, and most other professions, cannot be practiced without a lot more invest…

> and time (so one can spend hours required reading tutorials/watching videos)

This is maybe not out of reach for an average teenager, but it is definitely out of reach for quite a substantial portion of the population, the poorest percentile might just not have the time to dabble in programming. They might have to take care of siblings, work for a living or to pay for college later.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#108

Post by ghaff »

namanyayg wrote: post #94
snowwrestler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

Doing software development in high school requires a computer (even a ~$400 that is shared with the family is sufficient), interest, and time (so one can spend hours required reading tutorials/watching videos). Basically, nothing too much out of the reach of your average teenager -- with the exception of interest/dedication to the art. Doctors, and most other professions, cannot be practiced without a lot more invest…

You're arguing about a specific example but there are many examples from STEM fields. For example, becoming a mechanical engineer doesn't carry the same expectation (from some) that you have spent your childhood tinkering with automobiles and other mechanical devices. There is some truth that it's more straightforward for kids to work with software than in the case of, say, chemical engineering. But it shouldn't be a disqualification if they developed an interest in the profession later in life.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#109

Post by TictacTactic »

As a dev straight out of university this blog resonates with me. I know I don't even come close in knowledge to a senior dev so in interviews I try to emphasis that I have a hard working personality, positive attitude, strong desire to learn, etc. Traits I think a company would really want if a dev was lacking in the specific skills. Sadly it feels like it always falls flat and I end up coming across as naive.

I think mainly the problem is rooted in employers cynical approach to hiring employees. It's hard to evaluate people on less measurable data points when you don't trust them. It's easier to trust tests with easily quantifiable results rather than those with grey areas.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#110

Post by dasil003 »

iamdave wrote: post #97
maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs someone who had 10 years experience but doesn't care Why? This is a legitimate, but deeply opinionated "why". You employing me and me working for you is a business transaction. Why should I care about your mission beyond giving enough 'care' to produce great work that helps you run your business, run it well, so much that you'll wa…

That's legitimate, and I would take you any day over someone who cared a lot but had no relevant skills. However caring about the business is absolutely a value-add. Don't get me wrong, you should be careful to avoid being taken advantage of, but generally you will have better career progression if you can inhabit the space between emotional disengagement and being a kool-aid drinking doormat—it's actually a pretty wide space.
Post reply on HN