Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study • Hacker News Board

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#651

Post by golemiprague » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:24 PM UTC

solidasparagus wrote: post #227

mathattack wrote: post #213

This is why internships are so important. Sometimes it’s still hard to tell after 10 weeks. It’s very naive to think we will know after a 30 minute interview.

I don't think people are naive, they just don't have a better solution. Most established professionals are not interested in a 10 week trial period after which they might be back on the job market.

But we do have better solution, I just have a talk with the candidate like they do in other professions, trying to suss out what they did and to what level. If they sound good to me I just take them for a trial as contractors for 3 months and if all is going well I switch them to full time. My success rate is no different to any other method.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#652

Post by rsweeney21 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:24 PM UTC

mattkrause wrote: post #615

rsweeney21 wrote: post #448

I'm a ex-FANG dev that started a recruiting company, so I am VERY familiar with the arbitrary tech interview process. I'm a huge proponent of contract-to-hire. Even started a company* to make it easier for companies to offer contract-to-hire. Now before you dismiss the idea because you are "too good" to do C2H hear me out. Everyone knows that actually working with someone on the job is the only way to get an accurate…

How does this work with non-local applicants? I would certainly move, even internationally, for the right job, but I'm not going to relocate for a shot at a job.

Yeah, I wouldn't relocate for a C2H job either, unless it was a dream job or something. I think in those cases it would be best to opt for salaried and just deal with the current technical interview process.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#653

Post by gmantg » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:26 PM UTC

decafninja wrote: post #41

erentz wrote: post #11

It was made the clearest to me when I interviewed a colleague who had left to another company and two years later was interviewing to return. I knew he knew everything and had the skills for the job because, well, I know him, I’d worked with him before. He’d done this very job previously. Yet he still performed terribly in the interview and (rightly or wrongly) I had to base my evaluation on my knowledge of him rathe…

I feel in the tech industry, networking and knowing people only gets you so far - typically just to the whiteboard interview. Then you have to solve the leetcode problems just like everyone else. Especially so in larger companies. FWIW, all of my friends who somehow managed to get into FAANG or other top tech companies swear that were they to go through the interview again, odds are they would fail. This despite all…

Networking can in fact overturn results of the interview loop. In some cases, the result is known and the interview is arranged to support the case. You may outright fail some questions, and still get a green light from those interviewers.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#654

Post by rsweeney21 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:30 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #636

rsweeney21 wrote: post #448

I'm a ex-FANG dev that started a recruiting company, so I am VERY familiar with the arbitrary tech interview process. I'm a huge proponent of contract-to-hire. Even started a company* to make it easier for companies to offer contract-to-hire. Now before you dismiss the idea because you are "too good" to do C2H hear me out. Everyone knows that actually working with someone on the job is the only way to get an accurate…

Everybody does not in fact know that "actually working with someone" is the "only" way to get an accurate evaluation of an engineer. There are recruiting/qualification disciplines besides temp-to-hire and whiteboard interviews. Temp-to-hire is problematic for its own distinctive reasons: * It's difficult to generate apples-to-apples comparisons of candidates in a temp-to-hire setting because the engineering workload…

On principal, I don't think "temp-to-hire" is the same thing as contract-to-hire. With a contract to hire roles, you are filling a full-time position on your team with someone that is paid differently. They are treated as a new hire.

I wouldn't take a "temp-to-hire" or a job with a trial period either.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#655

Post by leafboi » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:31 PM UTC

If the results of this experiment are true part of winning the game may be taking some anti-anxiety drugs before the interview... I heard high blood pressure medicine works.

Anybody have any first hand accounts on using drugs to calm anxiety before the interview?

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#656

Post by rsweeney21 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:32 PM UTC

solidsnack9000 wrote: post #529

rsweeney21 wrote: post #448

I'm a ex-FANG dev that started a recruiting company, so I am VERY familiar with the arbitrary tech interview process. I'm a huge proponent of contract-to-hire. Even started a company* to make it easier for companies to offer contract-to-hire. Now before you dismiss the idea because you are "too good" to do C2H hear me out. Everyone knows that actually working with someone on the job is the only way to get an accurate…

There is something to this idea, but the discount on the first few months of work as an opportunity to "prove your value" doesn't make any sense. If your value isn't sufficient, they shouldn't renew or take the next step. The C2H process already excludes the value of many valuable benefits.

You're actually paid more cash during the contract period because you have additional expenses. You wouldn't be working for less.

However, it is likely you'll be able to negotiate a higher base salary when you convert than you would have been able to negotiate if you had hired on directly as a salaried employee, because it would cause them extreme pain to try and replace you.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#657

Post by doteka » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:33 PM UTC

bllguo wrote: post #649

nend wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like take homes for two reasons: 1) It's less time spent talking with potential coworkers. Which for me, coworkers (and how we work together/get along) determine about 90% of how satisfied I am with my job (assuming pay/benefits are standard). 2) You're still going to require me to take a day off and stand up in front of a whiteboard anyway eventually. Every take home I've done is an early stage filter. The f…

2. is the biggest thing for me. Exactly the same experience. I would be happy with take-homes if companies actually trusted them. The biggest reason I'm willing to do them is to avoid the whiteboarding. Of course from their perspective I could be getting someone else to do it for me or something. Or maybe the take-home leaked (which becomes more probable as the company grows).

I’m surprised this is your experience.

At my current employer, that’s exactly how we approach hiring. I send the candidate a take-home that broadly covers the basic tech skills they need to be effective in their role (implement a simple test api, some questions about scaling web apps in production, and a possible architecture sketch for a described system). It’s expected to be around 4 hours of work. If they pass that, the interview is free of technical topics - we just talk about your past experience and assess whether you’d be a good fit for the team.

Is this not how other take-home assignments work?

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#658

Post by RandallBrown » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:33 PM UTC

rc-1140 wrote: post #482

rsweeney21 wrote: post #448

I'm a ex-FANG dev that started a recruiting company, so I am VERY familiar with the arbitrary tech interview process. I'm a huge proponent of contract-to-hire. Even started a company* to make it easier for companies to offer contract-to-hire. Now before you dismiss the idea because you are "too good" to do C2H hear me out. Everyone knows that actually working with someone on the job is the only way to get an accurate…

Sorry, but C2H sounds like a great idea to you because you have the luxury of having already earned FAANG money on your side. You'd have to pay me considerable money for me to consider taking a C2H role so I could cover health insurance across the usual suspects (general health, dental, vision, specialists just in case). Like many people outside of this website (and enough here), I don't have the luxury of FAANG mone…

At my company we do contract to hire, but it's only about 4-8 hours of work. The intention isn't to replace your current job, it's to compensate you for doing extra work for our company while we interview you.

When I was hired I did about 1-2 hours of work for 3 days, after my normal job and was hired before even finishing the "project".

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#659

Post by jlokier » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:33 PM UTC

tbirdny wrote: post #537

I see lots of posts critical of companies and interviewers. The problem is there are too many qualified candidates for some jobs and companies must weed out candidates somehow. If they have 100 qualified candidates for 1 position, how would you rather they pick? The real problem is something else. It's a lack of jobs, inequality, the cost of living, and I don't know what else. Many people are getting squeezed.

It's not due to lack of jobs, at least not in a simple way.

Reportedly, there are simultaneously more open positions than companies can fill with qualified candidates, at the same time as many qualified candidates struggling to find open positions they can fill.

I think that may be true, even though it sounds paradoxical.

The result is still inequality, cost of living peoples and people getting squeezed.

But adding a bunch more of the same jobs won't fix it, if the problem isn't caused by lack of jobs.

Re: Tech sector job interviews assess anxiety, not software skills: study

#660

Post by cwkoss » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 10:33 PM UTC

I'm pretty proud of the interview loop we use at DefenseStorm:

- First section is "pair programming". We try to replicate what coding on the job is actually like: you can whatever IDE/REPL/language you want and can use google to look up docs. Our problem is specifically designed to be a fiddly problem which leads to edge-case handling with no possible 'beautiful algorithm' answer. Once they get the first solution, they have to revise their code to support a new fiddly use case. One interviewer actually provides help: pointing out syntax errors and suggesting alternate approaches if they appear to be heading towards a dead end. Most applicants "succeed" - so we evaluate on how well they can keep their code organized and readable, how they respond to suggestions, and if they are easy to work with/good communicators.

- Second section is code review. We give them several snippets of not-so-great code and ask what they would suggest we change before putting it into production. Does a great job of showing us where the candidate has depth of knowledge, and is a good approximation of a portion of the duties we expect them to perform. I was surprised to learn that very few companies do this - we find it extremely valuable.

- Third section is a conversation about tool familiarity (can you linux/aws?), depth of knowledge in the various domains we use regularly and designing an architecture (indicative of developer seniority). This is probably the least remarkable section.

Every section is set up so there are no gotchas and there are always multiple correct answers. I think we do better than most at minimizing the anxiety inherent to the interview process.