371–380 of 694 posts
Having said that, I actually agree with everything the article says.
Isn't it just... mostly money? I mean, if you want to hire someone good, who presumably has a good job, you have to pay better than what they are getting now. I think this is probably especially true in Europe; I mean, as far as I know, people get like a 2x-4x raise moving to silicon valley from europe. If you pay more than your local competitors, you will largely have your pick of the candidates. I mean, yes, things…
One factor to keep in mind here, though, is that the cost of living there is so insane that even a multiplier on pay could go with a total quality of life decrease.
There is a lot of complaining about hiring processes these days. I think both algorithmic questions and work samples have an important role. Algorithmic questions are presented with a time lot, you get an idea of how the candidate thinks through problems. These questions I think reflect general intelligence. Work samples reflect effort and experience, which is also important. People like to complain about one or the…
>I think both algorithmic questions and work samples have an important role. I'm a senior engineer at one of the top tech companies. I hold the opinion the interview processed is heavily biased towards college grads or kids who are fresh on algorithms. I think this helps us hire mostly kids who are book smart but aren't necessarily great (or even "good") employees... I'll do some hand waving here and define good as s…
The questions being asked aren't extremely challenging, they can be trained for. Willingness to learn new things (even if useless) and put in the effort to pass interviews is a positive signal imo.
On that note, it seems like HN has assumed the only work that exists is writing CRUD apps and not worrying about performance. There are many roles where you do need to have a strong understanding of performance and algorithms, and those are the difference between a smooth rollout and crashes in the middle of the night.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. If you can’t tell the difference between a smooth talker and strong technical competence you are probably interested in the wrong qualities. I have interviewed enough now to see why some companies cannot figure it out. Ask yourself if you really actually want a senior or a strong junior. It comes down to interest. A good senior got that way because they like solving challenging problems. They are not inte…
I hear what you're saying, but I think you're maybe creating a straw man argument here. A smooth talking engineer isn't one who sounds like a used car salesperson or is just hyped about the latest trendy framework. There are people who can talk through challenging problems at their former companies and how the problems were solved. They can tell you everything you'd want to hear because it's true. Except…they didn't…
What is system engineering?
It's not just you; the entire IT industry is suffering from systemic curriculum vitae bloat. That's why the working conditions are so bad in the professional sense.
Hands down, the number one problem in hiring and retaining senior engineers is being able to match the compensation level. FAANG-type companies have a huge difference to practically everyone else. Startups, especially, can’t match the salary, and few make up for it in equity comparable to the risk level engineers take on by accepting the job. Senior engineers typically know better, and so you end up with mid or even…
I disagree a bit here. Of course, salary is very important, but I (and many people I know) would easily choose (and have chosen) a lower salary for any combination of these perks: - Work fewer hours - Work from anywhere - Work in a specific location - Work in a certain environment - Work in a specific kind of organization - Work with specific technologies - etc. People are very different and have very different wishe…
The YC startup I worked for got acquired recently. I was employee #38. I've still made more in RSUs working at a big tech company than I would have made had I stayed the full four years and vested all my options. In fact I got a bigger RSU award this year than what I got from my stock in the acquisition.
Startups would be well-advised to hire fewer people, get rid of under-performers quickly, and reserve an extra slice in the cap table for really high performers. If someone comes along that creates entire new features on their own initiative (features still featured prominently in your marketing) then may I suggest you continue to award that person either their initial grant or half (depending on how much it was) on a yearly basis? Even if that means you skip an extra hire that year you'll still come out ahead, both by keeping your high performer happy and by saving the extra salary.
(I want to be clear: The founders were well within their rights to deny my requests for more options and I hold no ill will toward them. It was their business, not mine, and they were free to run it however they wanted.)
> I have more than 7 years of experience in Software Development, Product Management and Project Management
7 years is enough now, to be making industry recommendations about difficulty hiring senior staff?
I'm not saying you can't get a good idea of part of the industry in that time, but it seems a bit of a stretch to claim sweeping knowledge of the whole space.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. If you can’t tell the difference between a smooth talker and strong technical competence you are probably interested in the wrong qualities. I have interviewed enough now to see why some companies cannot figure it out. Ask yourself if you really actually want a senior or a strong junior. It comes down to interest. A good senior got that way because they like solving challenging problems. They are not inte…
Are things in place to make the job easier? Seniors don’t need easier and this is a huge turnoff. What? I feel like you have a very narrow-minded idea of what sr engineers want.
Another buddy with longterm CTO experience had 150 applications with a 2% hit-rate.
On the "better" AngelList CTO/Senior jobs we can clearly see that there's already 50-100 other applications submitted.
So is this really that big of an issue as presented?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recall an interview I was brought into early in my career to talk with someone being brought into be a senior architect... in my mind this meant this dude must be crazy smart right. Everyone in room had all basically made up thier minds and loved the guy. I gave a variable like a = [1,2,4,8,9]; And asked if he could write a loop and print out the values of each element. He embarrassingly could not. I always ask thi…
But are architects supposed to write code? The example you give is embarrassingly simple and anyone should be (expected to be) able to write code for it. But aren't architects designing architecture. I don't think the architect or anyone in his team at my previous organization's IT dept could write code, but he could design system architecture.