The software industry's greatest sin: hiring • Hacker News Board

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#31

Post by renewiltord » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:25 AM UTC

You've got to know if the other person can code. Lots of people can talk a mean game and make nothing and few people can spot them.

That's the thing, though. If you make a reputation as the kind of guy who can near 100% spot the good engineers, you will make boatloads of money. An employer will pay you more than $30k if you only do great hires. You do 10 of them with your conversation out to lunch and you've made $300k. That's the low-end.

But no one can do that and the few with high hit-rates act as executive-search agencies where they make a lot more.

But I think I would never interview anyone I've worked with. That just seems like a waste. I already either know that they can or can't do things.

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#32

Post by agumonkey » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:26 AM UTC

jackcosgrove wrote: post #22

Technical interviews were once seen as a breath of fresh air. You can be a nobody without connections or degrees and if you can prove you have skills during an interview process you may be hired. Contrast this with other hiring processes which are more irrational, like med residency match, investment banks favoring "target school graduates", law firms favoring "top 14 graduates", etc. I think whiteboarding is dumb an…

Maybe due to the importance of soft skills ? or maybe a shift into the belief that they are important ?

How was it in the 80s or 90s ? could you be hired just because you can fix or implement something even if you don't fit that well with a group ?

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#33

Post by gonehome » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:26 AM UTC

jackcosgrove wrote: post #22

Technical interviews were once seen as a breath of fresh air. You can be a nobody without connections or degrees and if you can prove you have skills during an interview process you may be hired. Contrast this with other hiring processes which are more irrational, like med residency match, investment banks favoring "target school graduates", law firms favoring "top 14 graduates", etc. I think whiteboarding is dumb an…

It’s largely still that way - you need to know someone to get the referral to get the whiteboard interview (after two phone screens).

That said it’s at least a partially objective skill check and I don’t know a better way.

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#34

Post by thaumasiotes » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:28 AM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #16

To the best of my knowledge, my workplace uses a fairly traditional hiring process that's the same for hiring a programmer or a machinist: Resume screen, phone screen, on-site, offer. I have to say we do really darn well, especially given we're located in the Midwest and supposedly the brightest programmers have fled to the hot markets. One thing I like is that we get a range of ages, which is heartwarming given that…

> a fairly traditional hiring process that's the same for hiring a programmer or a machinist: Resume screen, phone screen, on-site, offer.

Some years ago, I was looking for a job, and an employed friend of mine sent me a problem and said "this is our hiring challenge. Try it out".

I completed it, and she asked for my resume, and turned in both to whoever the relevant person was at her company.

She then reported back to me "he said this is the best response he's ever seen to the challenge, but we're looking for someone with more experience". I was not contacted by anyone else.

And years later, when I ribbed her about this, she told me "he regretted that, later".

I note that by putting the resumé screen first, you're committing yourself to the idea that whatever you're looking for in the resumé screen is more important than anything you might learn in the phone screen or the on-site. Do you believe that? Are the phases looking for the same things? If not, is that intentional?

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#35

Post by agumonkey » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:29 AM UTC

sumanthvepa wrote: post #6

This makes so much sense. I've stopped doing in-depth technical interviews for precisely this reason. Instead, I take the developer out for lunch and spend an afternoon discussing our software stack and business with them. It always gives be better results. There is no stress. I don't want to see their code, but I do want to understand how they think and work.

ah man, I proposed a 5min flash version of that. Take me to your war room, I'll show you if I can contribute or not in 30 seconds. I won't resent you, and you won't waste time :)

I'm quite happy knowing people tried this.

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#36

Post by jackcosgrove » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:30 AM UTC

agumonkey wrote: post #32

jackcosgrove wrote: post #22

Technical interviews were once seen as a breath of fresh air. You can be a nobody without connections or degrees and if you can prove you have skills during an interview process you may be hired. Contrast this with other hiring processes which are more irrational, like med residency match, investment banks favoring "target school graduates", law firms favoring "top 14 graduates", etc. I think whiteboarding is dumb an…

Maybe due to the importance of soft skills ? or maybe a shift into the belief that they are important ? How was it in the 80s or 90s ? could you be hired just because you can fix or implement something even if you don't fit that well with a group ?

80s: we need to hire somebody who can code

90s: we need to hire everybody who can code

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#37

Post by renewiltord » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

ausjke wrote: post #18

The best way I see it, is to have this guy to work for a while, say a few weeks or a few months as a contractor, then either ends it or converts to a permanent job. This is the best interview approach.

You're probably locking out a lot of foreigners that way, but if you find that your top-of-funnel has enough people, this will work really well.

Lots of the consultant gigs that people do actually end up with being hired at the company they consulted for.

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#38

Post by papeda » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

The problem I keep running into is that the more room for nuance and fit and holistic evaluation that you inject into a hiring process, the more room there is for interviewers to fill that space with their own biases toward hiring people like themselves. In that sense, the white board problems are pretty fair, even if they're (very) imperfect.

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#39

Post by kamikaz1k » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:32 AM UTC

gonehome wrote: post #33

jackcosgrove wrote: post #22

Technical interviews were once seen as a breath of fresh air. You can be a nobody without connections or degrees and if you can prove you have skills during an interview process you may be hired. Contrast this with other hiring processes which are more irrational, like med residency match, investment banks favoring "target school graduates", law firms favoring "top 14 graduates", etc. I think whiteboarding is dumb an…

It’s largely still that way - you need to know someone to get the referral to get the whiteboard interview (after two phone screens). That said it’s at least a partially objective skill check and I don’t know a better way.

Plenty of people freely offer referrals, since they get referral bonuses (or feel like they wanna help people out).

Re: The software industry's greatest sin: hiring

#40

Post by lazyjones » Fri, Apr 10, 2020, 2:32 AM UTC

People who hire developers wouldn't be as focused on the candidates' experience with the technology in the job ad if developers were typically more open for new tech that would be learnt at the job. Try to teach a 40+ Perl developer a new language if you want to see what I mean...

When you compare IT with other industries like the author did, this is what makes hiring so different. Other industries are fine with hiring graduates with no specific experience and the candidates are eager to learn on the job. Whereas in IT, half the people will tell you "can't do this", "don't like that", "won't learn Java" ...