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

Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

jarednelsen.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 538 posts

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#371

Post by jjav »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #214
52-6F-62 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By standardizing the hiring process aren’t you then just optimizing for a very specific perception and/or perceptional ability? Isn’t that at the core of principles relating to diversity in the first place? I personally find some of the current (if I can call them) standards of tech hiring to be very narrow in which skills and capabilities they test. It presumes a lot—particularly that one has time and resources to c…

> I personally find some of the current (if I can call them) standards of tech hiring to be very narrow in which skills and capabilities they test. What would you propose as an alternative? I’ve been involved in training new engineering managers how to hire and interview. Everyone starts with the best intentions, but reality quickly forces some compromises. The bottom line is that you only have a number of hours in w…

> What would you propose as an alternative?

Easy. Just talk to people as would-be peers. They want to find a role they can succeed in. You want to find someone who can succeed in the role.

I interview by just talking about their past projects (based on resume). You can't fake your way through a friendly technical dialogue if you haven't done it. (Pre-requisite: the interviewer must be technically competent. This is where many companies miss. Algorithm puzzles won't make up for it.)

Also it is important to describe the role and expectations in detail. Nobody (really: nobody) wants to get hired in a role just to be let go in six months. There is no need for elaborate whiteboard algorithm dances which discriminate against everyone who doesn't have the time to memorize every possible question. Just be up front about the requirements and let the candidate decide if it's a match. They know themselves better than you ever will.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#372

Post by TuringNYC »

fzeroracer wrote: post #65
scarface74 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But while they are getting guidance and mentorship, they are not being a productive member of the team, taking time away from experienced developers and as soon as they level up they will change companies and the next company didn’t have to invest training time. I know everyone has to start somewhere but from the company’s perspective, hiring a junior developer doesn’t make sense.

I'm really not sure where people got this idea that junior developers that are being mentored cannot contribute to the team. Are they going to contribute as much as a senior dev? No, but they can still contribute in significant ways. They can still fix bugs and find issues in your system, bring a fresh perspective on design and take ownership over smaller parts of the codebase. The reason why junior developers jump s…

Career track is a great point. I’ve already seen two organizations that refuse to provide any structured job growth or career track — then they wonder why attrition is so high amongst top performers or why “knowledge keeps walking out the door.”

One even hired McKinsey to analyze the issue. If they had given away the McKinsey fees as raises it would have solved the issues easily.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#373

Post by TeMPOraL »

omar_a1 wrote: post #349
giovannibonetti wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What would you propose as an alternative? In my company (totally remote) we decided to automate hiring (also remote) as most as possible and we are happy with the results. We also value the candidate's time very much so we made the hiring process very straightforward. It works like this: - First the candidates must do some online tests, which are mostly multiple choice questions. The subjects are logic, english and…

Sorry, but what you've outlined above doesn't show that you value the candidates' time. You require two rounds of technical interviews before any human contact. It's asymmetrical. By automating the first two steps, you've made it so that you can waste as much of the applicants' time as you want without expending any further time or resources on your part. Also, from experience, I've never come across a two hour takeh…

This is unfair. A typical, half-competent candidate in tech sends much fewer applications before they find a job than a typical company has to process in the same time span. So there's indeed an asymmetry here, but in the other direction - few companies could even afford to fully process every single application that comes in (not even counting the human toil on the interviewers from dealing with spam).

4 hours over two steps to get to the human part? I wouldn't mind it. Last company I successfully interviewed, I spent about 2 hours on the phone with different people + a lot of e-mail exchange, before I got to 4 hours long on-site.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#374

Post by TuringNYC »

wanderer2323 wrote: post #334
peter_d_sherman wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, it probably wouldn't work for the FAANG companies... I posted what I said as a note to my future self, if/when I run a software engineering company... if/when that happens, then that's how I'm going to handle hiring...

Out of curiousity, why do you think that your intake from the `minimal salary barely enough for living expenses` job posting will contain any talented candidates at all?

They will attract desperate candidates, which some companies often want. Then they carry the person on a leash.

This will differentiate companies looking for true partnership with an engineer vs those who need hamsters in a wheel.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#375

Post by TeMPOraL »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #310
missosoup wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there are legal issues with a quota (I'm legitimately not sure whether there are), then the law ought to be changed. That would be quite literally destroying the anti-discrimination laws which safeguard the exact thing that you think you're arguing in favour of. Quotas implemented the way you describe are the antithesis of equal opportunity. That 'instinctual negative reaction' you come across is people seeing t…

I don't think we need to have the same rules for well-represented and underrepresented groups. A reasonable person is fully capable of determining which is which. "Reverse racism" is not a real phenomenon in 99% of cases.

"Reverse racism" is a term that was created to redefine "racism" so that people engaging in racism could say they're not engaging in it, because their kind of racism is not racism.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#376

Post by TeMPOraL »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #262
ScottFree wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we once rejected someone on ethical grounds after they passed all the interviews What did they do? Suggest sacrificing a puppy to moloch to make a feature release go smoothly?

Does that work? It might be worth a try?

Of course it does. Most companies do this (albeit not with literal puppies), so do governments and people in general.

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#377

Post by TeMPOraL »

wbl wrote: post #313
dahfizz wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that JS developers don't do anything that needs algorithm knowledge is funny to me.

Frontend isn't going to require you to use union find and when it does you can look it up.

That would be true if frontend people were just doing webpage styling, and not web applications that often don't even have a backend.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#378

Post by fphhotchips »

giovannibonetti wrote: post #297
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally find some of the current (if I can call them) standards of tech hiring to be very narrow in which skills and capabilities they test. What would you propose as an alternative? I’ve been involved in training new engineering managers how to hire and interview. Everyone starts with the best intentions, but reality quickly forces some compromises. The bottom line is that you only have a number of hours in w…

> What would you propose as an alternative? In my company (totally remote) we decided to automate hiring (also remote) as most as possible and we are happy with the results. We also value the candidate's time very much so we made the hiring process very straightforward. It works like this: - First the candidates must do some online tests, which are mostly multiple choice questions. The subjects are logic, english and…

I can't lie to you, I wouldn't go through that process. Or, if I did, you'd be at the bottom of the stack for me.

Half the interview process is about selling the company to the candidate. How can I know if I want to put up with your bullshit tests if I don't know whether I'm going to enjoy working with you?

The message you're sending with more automation is simple: you will be a cog in a machine here. We're not interested in what you have to say, we're only interested in whether you're smarter than the average bear.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#379

Post by missosoup »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #375
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think we need to have the same rules for well-represented and underrepresented groups. A reasonable person is fully capable of determining which is which. "Reverse racism" is not a real phenomenon in 99% of cases.

"Reverse racism" is a term that was created to redefine "racism" so that people engaging in racism could say they're not engaging in it, because their kind of racism is not racism.

It's worse. It's not just 'wrong kind of racism', it's 'if you were born with attributes XYZ you should never be called racist, even if without those attributes your actions would be labelled as racist'.

The notion of reverse racism is something that requires religion-like amounts of self delusion and selective consumption of facts. The flaws of the notion are just too glaring for any rational individual to overlook even at first examination.

Re: Follow-up to “The dystopian world of software engineering interviews”

#380

Post by fphhotchips »

klipklop wrote: post #222
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I worked at a company where the interview process was basically "ask them about their experience, successes, and failures, and do whatever technical screen you feel works." I'm part of another online community that has a strong emphasize on social justice issues. These "just wing it" hiring practices are one of their biggest complaints about tech companies. There's a perception that the less well-defined and struct…

The "standardized" interview at companies like Google has lead to them hiring mostly White/Asian males though... I have had plenty of people tell me that interviewing at Google is essentially a roll of the dice these days. You can answer all the 5x interviews in a satisfactory manner and still get rejected. I feel "just wing it" can lead to somebody talented from a non-traditional background getting a chance at a gre…

I 100% agree with you. I got my shot at my job title (not SWE, but in SaaS) from a non-traditional background for that role because the hiring manager was given carte-blanche to find the person he wanted to work with. We had breakfast, we clicked, we spent two years killing it. No way my resume gets through a more traditional hiring process (I know this, because I know some of the traditional hiring team wanted to throw out my resume).
Post reply on HN