Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#291

Post by scarface74 » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 2:17 PM UTC

pdimitar wrote: post #268

scarface74 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never done any leetCode style interviewing or studying, but from what I have heard, it’s all about “pattern matching” and knowing how to solve similar problems. I have done plenty of architecting. A large percentage of architectural problems that you are asked to solve have already been solved. After enough years at enough different companies and reading enough architectural books, it’s just pattern matching and…

Can you recommend several such books?

(None of these are affiliate links)

https://www.amazon.com/Domain-Driven-Design-Tackling-Complex...

https://www.amazon.com/Clean-Code-Handbook-Software-Craftsma...

https://www.amazon.com/Clean-Architecture-Craftsmans-Softwar...

https://www.amazon.com/Patterns-Enterprise-Application-Archi...

https://www.amazon.com/Refactoring-Improving-Existing-Addiso...

https://www.amazon.com/Code-Complete-Practical-Handbook-Cons...

https://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Programmer-Journeyman-Maste...

https://www.amazon.com/Mythical-Man-Month-Software-Engineeri...

And just because it’s asked at every interview.

https://www.amazon.com/Design-Patterns-Object-Oriented-Addis...

I’m focused on AWS these days, but a lot of these principals are universal.

https://d1.awsstatic.com/whitepapers/architecture/AWS_Well-A...

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#292

Post by JustSomeNobody » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 2:21 PM UTC

thewhitetulip wrote: post #273

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #14

> But the aha moment for me was that not everyone does well in those fast-paced brainstorming sessions. A lot of people (including me) prefer to sit with a cup of coffee and some data and try to think things through. This is me. Hard to get that across in an interview, but once people work with me, they're cool with me coming back an hour later in an email with some thoughts on the last meeting topic. They know and r…

I had a different experience. They gave me a lot of time but either I don't know python at all, or they didn't. they asked me to build something. I used dictionaries and wrote the code in ten minutes. Both interviewers wouldn't believe that the code could solve the problem. They later told me that dictionaries are not used in practical applications. Never understood why. Are dicts not used in "real life"?

Dictionaries are used ALL the time.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#293

Post by bshacklett » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 2:26 PM UTC

thewhitetulip wrote: post #273

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #14

> But the aha moment for me was that not everyone does well in those fast-paced brainstorming sessions. A lot of people (including me) prefer to sit with a cup of coffee and some data and try to think things through. This is me. Hard to get that across in an interview, but once people work with me, they're cool with me coming back an hour later in an email with some thoughts on the last meeting topic. They know and r…

I had a different experience. They gave me a lot of time but either I don't know python at all, or they didn't. they asked me to build something. I used dictionaries and wrote the code in ten minutes. Both interviewers wouldn't believe that the code could solve the problem. They later told me that dictionaries are not used in practical applications. Never understood why. Are dicts not used in "real life"?

I'm not the best with Python, but if someone gave me that answer I'd feel like I avoided a land mine. Dicts, and analogous data types, are incredibly useful.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#294

Post by andrewflnr » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 2:28 PM UTC

em-bee wrote: post #255

vijucat wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha, wonderful expression, thanks. Given that many people report that their best thinking is done while walking or taking a jog, it might not be too wild to try out interviews which allow the candidate to take a walk before they give an answer.

that's an interesting idea. how can we implement that without it becoming awkward? the problem i see is this: it is unexpected, so the interviewee doesn't know what to make of that offer. i don't know how much time to give them, and they don't know how much time they need. they also don't know how much time they should take. i don't even know if they are the type that likes to take a quiet time to think. if they aren…

The solution to unexpectedness is to tell them up front what you're going to offer. With that in mind, I like the idea of the "coffee break" where you're allowed to wander off.

Of course, you can also just leave the room while they're working on it.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#295

Post by kronin » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 2:29 PM UTC

indymike wrote: post #290

kronin wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My interview covers coding, data structures, algorithms, system design and data modeling. I attempt to tailor to the candidate, but there needs to be some level of standardization to be able to justify to the recruiters why a candidate didn't proceed. Just because a candidate fails or falls short in one area doesn't mean they are cut, but it's a pretty large red flag if a candidate purports to know something, both on…

Do you allow candidates to use their normal workflow (which is dependent on access to Google, github and q&a sites) or are we putting people in an idealized workflow where the dev has to know everything? I think many developers and interviewers think using Google and StackOverflow is a sign of weakness. It may or may not be, but it is normal in many developers workflows. Thoughts?

I tell the candidates that I will happily be their Google/stack overflow. Some candidates ask questions along that line, some don't.

I agree that we don't code in a vacuum. What I'm trying to ascertain in the interview is how someone thinks, how they approach a problem and work through the solution. The more they communicate the better, even if part of that communication is "is there a length property on the String class?"

I note, but don't give it too much weight, if there are minor syntax errors. I ask candidates to walk through their code with an example input, especially the ones that have errors. If they catch their errors and fix them, I note that. If they skip over their errors because they assume the code does what they wanted it to, I note that.

Ultimately, can you reason through the problem, come up with a solution, and talk about the tradeoffs you made in your implementation. Any senior should be able to handle that without any preparation.

I worked at a FAANG where in several loop debriefs I was challenged on the complexity of my question. One of the challengers asks a chutes and ladders question (given a random chutes and ladders board, where you can choose between 1-6 for every move, what is the minimum number of moves to get to the end).

It doesn't take a hard technical question to figure out whether someone knows how to think and work through problems.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#296

Post by ghaff » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 2:31 PM UTC

solatic wrote: post #243

Dogfooding their process is going to give them adverse results here: Microsoft is paying them to take all the time they want, but good candidates won't be so willing to spend so much time. Already, they're up to a full day of interviews, which is ridiculous. One of the worst parts of current FAANG interviewing is how long it takes to get to the day of interviews, needing to take off from work to attend the interview…

I sorta agree on the latency although there are a lot of unavoidable reasons that happens including but not limited to travel schedules of the decision makers and the need to interview multiple candidates.

However TBH an in-person day with 4 or so interviews (perhaps post a phone screen) is absolutely standard for all sorts of professional positions and has been for many decades. I can only think of one case where I just had an informal in-person lunch instead--and that was a case where I knew the company's owner very well.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#297

Post by jasonlotito » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 2:38 PM UTC

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #71

jasonkester wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You use the term "apply for a job", which might explain the disconnect. The post you reply to isn't about applying for jobs. You don't want to "apply" for things. You want your google VP to be having a beer with your ex-boss and worrying that his pet project was going to fail because they just can't find a guy who can really $X. But your ex boss knows a guy who absoulutely can $X, and just finished $X'ing his company…

You clearly don’t work in the industry. Edit: I see from your other post you haven’t interviewed since 1999. Sounds about right. The hiring process does not work how you think it should.

He's a contractor. He comes in, does a specific task, and then leaves. That's all.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#298

Post by Draiken » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 3:02 PM UTC

vaststag wrote: post #238

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #14

> But the aha moment for me was that not everyone does well in those fast-paced brainstorming sessions. A lot of people (including me) prefer to sit with a cup of coffee and some data and try to think things through. This is me. Hard to get that across in an interview, but once people work with me, they're cool with me coming back an hour later in an email with some thoughts on the last meeting topic. They know and r…

i’m like this but admittedly, in some cases, you’re interviewing for roles where it’s critical you identify that candidate can think on their feet (eg devs that might need to serve in 24/7 ops roles), where “let me get back to you” isn’t a feasible option

That's reactive thinking and it honestly sucks. While you might encounter unexpected situations from time to time, a good ops person will be preventing problems a lot more than he firefights. If you only hire a good firefighter, he will do the only thing he knows ad infinitum.

I've worked with people that were reactive and would love to be "the fixer" when, in reality, 99% of the issues he fixed were caused by his ignorance/incompetence in the first place.

Specially for crucial 24/7 roles, you need people that think ahead and not reactive ones.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#299

Post by ghaff » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 3:09 PM UTC

em-bee wrote: post #260

kluyg wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, if only it was all unicorns and rainbows. What you describe is how I imagine they interview for director / VP positions. With hundreds (thousands?) of applications per day for software engineering positions, all with perfect resumes, what you describe just doesn’t scale. Software engineers do 1-2 interviews per week each, it’s part of the job. I might be a minority, but I would refuse to spend two of my evening…

if i am looking for a different job, i'll not just interview with one company, but several. even more so if i still have a job and i really need to weigh the options to decide if the new offer is really better. there is only so many days i can take off. with two weeks holidays, i might spend all of my holiday budget for this year.

I'm not sure what you think is a reasonable alternative. In general, having some F2F on-site interviews is in everyone's interest. I'll agree that there should be some reasonable pre-screening before everyone makes a significant time investment. But the reality is that if you're job hunting you may well have to take some time off--especially if the opportunities aren't local.

Re: Microsoft changed how it interviews software developers

#300

Post by solatic » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 3:17 PM UTC

kluyg wrote: post #246

solatic wrote: post #243

Dogfooding their process is going to give them adverse results here: Microsoft is paying them to take all the time they want, but good candidates won't be so willing to spend so much time. Already, they're up to a full day of interviews, which is ridiculous. One of the worst parts of current FAANG interviewing is how long it takes to get to the day of interviews, needing to take off from work to attend the interview…

Yeah, if only it was all unicorns and rainbows. What you describe is how I imagine they interview for director / VP positions. With hundreds (thousands?) of applications per day for software engineering positions, all with perfect resumes, what you describe just doesn’t scale. Software engineers do 1-2 interviews per week each, it’s part of the job. I might be a minority, but I would refuse to spend two of my evening…

> Software engineers do 1-2 interviews per week each, it’s part of the job. I might be a minority, but I would refuse to spend two of my evenings per week interviewing people.

Why are software engineers doing interviews at all? What makes software engineers qualified to interview people (especially when you consider the need to avoid hiring bias, problematic statements by interviewers that expose the company to legal suit, etc.)?

I'm not saying that companies should go to the other extreme and have all interviews conducted by HR - that presents its own set of problems in that HR doesn't know how to evaluate candidates for technical skill. But expecting hiring managers to open up a few evenings per week in the irregular and relatively uncommon circumstance (if it's common, then you have problems with churn on that team, and you should consider firing the manager) in which positions open up on their team to evaluate potential direct reports is not even remotely unreasonable.