Live data from Hacker News

When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

hiringengineersbook.com

21–30 of 694 posts

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#21
post #6

The words 'pay' and 'salary' do not appear in the article. They want senior engineers at intern prices.

Given that they don't mention anything to do with pay (as you say) how do you know that these people are only paying intern prices?

You're right I don't know, but that's been my personal experience. A lot of low offers.

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. In my experience, senior engineers are even better at glibly skirting what specific contributions they made at a company were, or what their true technical skillset is. They need to be tested. The fact that a lot of time senior engineers will get pulled in to interview from other companies because someone knows someone and has worked with them for a long time only exacerbates this problem.

> because someone knows someone and has worked with them for a long time only And this is the #1 thing that gets a near auto-hire from me. I'm not saying don't interview them, but most interviews don't really tell you what it's going to be like working with someone. On the other hand, WORKING with someone (for a long time) 100% tells you what it's like working with someone. If someone has worked a long time with some…

[deleted]

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#23
post #2

The blurred out job posting image is not very well blurred out. I could probably work out what it says if I spent some (tedious) time on it. The point it gets across is very very clear and useful though.

It's not blurred out to hide who it is. It's blurred out so we don't get stuck in the details. It's a UX technique.

EDIT: Well...fuck. Don't know how I missed that. He actually says it's to hide the poster.

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. In my experience, senior engineers are even better at glibly skirting what specific contributions they made at a company were, or what their true technical skillset is. They need to be tested. The fact that a lot of time senior engineers will get pulled in to interview from other companies because someone knows someone and has worked with them for a long time only exacerbates this problem.

> because someone knows someone and has worked with them for a long time only And this is the #1 thing that gets a near auto-hire from me. I'm not saying don't interview them, but most interviews don't really tell you what it's going to be like working with someone. On the other hand, WORKING with someone (for a long time) 100% tells you what it's like working with someone. If someone has worked a long time with some…

I can't tell if you're saying "look at their resume and see if they've successfully worked on teams for extended periods of time" (don't do this; it's a debacle of a signal) or "hire them if you yourself have worked with them before" (this works fine but network hiring can lead to brittle teams that fall apart as soon as 1-2 people move on).

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#25
post #3

A lot of this post seems pretty reasonable. But: In my experience, it’s fairly easy to judge technical skill. A friendly conversation about technical interests and recent projects can often be enough. Bullshit. Sounding credible in technical interviews is a skill, not the same skill as actually being a good programmer, and might even (statistically, in the large) be close to orthogonal to it. We found this out the ha…

The most annoying thing is when you show yourself perfectly capable of doing the technical challenge and still get passed up on the interview because they completely ignore the results and/or then check your ability to script on a whiteboard. I’d say the work sample is a waste of time if I didn’t view it as a learning exercise.

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#26
post #3

A lot of this post seems pretty reasonable. But: In my experience, it’s fairly easy to judge technical skill. A friendly conversation about technical interests and recent projects can often be enough. Bullshit. Sounding credible in technical interviews is a skill, not the same skill as actually being a good programmer, and might even (statistically, in the large) be close to orthogonal to it. We found this out the ha…

It does always amaze me that literally what you learn in HR 101 in an undergraduate management curriculum is controversial. The r^2 of a ton of different methods for predicting job performance is something large companies are highly incentivized to get studied by academics (and they do). Spoiler alert: work-sample tests are the only practical and generally tolerated one to use (for software engineers) that is actuall…

But it’s not generally tolerated. You end up optimizing for sub-prime candidates because those are the only ones desperate enough to take 4-6 hours out of their free time for a company that hasn’t even bothered interviewing you, yet.

If they want to turn the onsite into one big work sample, by all means, that sounds very effective (and something I’ve seen work well). But in my experience, you’re going to deter qualified candidates by forcing them to do take-home assignments.

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#27
post #3

A lot of this post seems pretty reasonable. But: In my experience, it’s fairly easy to judge technical skill. A friendly conversation about technical interests and recent projects can often be enough. Bullshit. Sounding credible in technical interviews is a skill, not the same skill as actually being a good programmer, and might even (statistically, in the large) be close to orthogonal to it. We found this out the ha…

The most annoying thing is when you show yourself perfectly capable of doing the technical challenge and still get passed up on the interview because they completely ignore the results and/or then check your ability to script on a whiteboard. I’d say the work sample is a waste of time if I didn’t view it as a learning exercise.

I couldn't possibly agree more. The current cargo-culted trend of take-home problems is a scourge. If you can't hire almost directly off the results of your challenges, you're wasting time and shouldn't do them at all.

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#29
post #3

A lot of this post seems pretty reasonable. But: In my experience, it’s fairly easy to judge technical skill. A friendly conversation about technical interests and recent projects can often be enough. Bullshit. Sounding credible in technical interviews is a skill, not the same skill as actually being a good programmer, and might even (statistically, in the large) be close to orthogonal to it. We found this out the ha…

When a guy tells you his experience, and you call bullshit, it's hard to tell whether you doubt his sincerity about having the experience at all or whether the experience itself was not representative of your reality. Either way, you're telling us not how it is, but how you are, and that's simply not useful.

In "The Last Starfighter", the recruiter/hiring manager Centauri is constantly accused of using "the Excalibur test" with derision, and which he denies. While I've never seen it explicitly defined, I'd imagine an on-the-spot work sample test to be what it means. "Pull this sword out of this stone and you get the job."

What proponents of the Excalibur test fail to realize is that their methods often spoil the data. Treat me with enough derision and pressure off the bat and I guarantee I'll fail your test even though I do fine at other companies.

Re: When hiring senior engineers, you’re not buying, you’re selling

#30
post #3

A lot of this post seems pretty reasonable. But: In my experience, it’s fairly easy to judge technical skill. A friendly conversation about technical interests and recent projects can often be enough. Bullshit. Sounding credible in technical interviews is a skill, not the same skill as actually being a good programmer, and might even (statistically, in the large) be close to orthogonal to it. We found this out the ha…

This is the only correct answer. White boarding is to coding what Foosball is to soccer. In my last in-person interview they asked me a bunch of trivia that was a simple google search away - so of course, why would I bother memorizing those things? I got a dear john letter back saying I wasn't smart enough or some such, and it's like "oh great, being called an idiot by an idiot". And that's most of my interviews if I…

That reminds me of the infamous "You, Jeepies?" programmer interview.

https://thedailywtf.com/articles/You,-Jeepies

Post reply on HN