The rise of never-ending job interviews

Post by dspillett » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 1:51 PM UTC

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #558

dspillett wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Done right there will be a lot more in there than syntax errors. A good example of this sort of test will separate those who have revised syntax without really thinking (they'll get the syntax errors but little or nothing else, great if you want to employ a human linter) from those who actually think about what they are looking at will spot much more (a logical error that would cause an infinite loop, a point where a…

Does this kind of trick question work well in practice? If they explicitly ask for syntax errors it would be a waste of time to also check the code for other errors. I can’t imagine many people opting to do that unless they know it’s a trick question.

Post by analyst74 » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 1:52 PM UTC

twelve40 wrote: post #15

vegetablepotpie wrote: post #2

What’s happening is that companies want to completely remove risk from the hiring process. In the real world, you cannot remove risk. You can manage it, but you cannot remove it. Asking candidates to go through 6 interviews before making a decision and not telling them when a decision will be made signals a risk adverse culture that cannot make decisions.

I don't know if you've been through the firing process on either side, but after you go through a couple of dozen of these, and the hit to the morale/performance they entail, not to mention emotions involved, you tend to at least try to vet better to avoid such huge distractions in the future (a lose-lose for everyone involved!)

Post by RHSeeger » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 1:54 PM UTC

michaelt wrote: post #448

trinovantes wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was for a junior c# position so I doubt it's applicable considering Visual Studio will point out the problems. But I'm curious what position would this question make sense?

> I'm curious what position would this question make sense? I was once asked a similar but better posed question: I was given some code and asked what I'd point out if asked to do a code review on it. And the code had loads of things wrong with it, from bad variable names and incorrect comments, through unit tests that didn't have any assertions and loops that weren't actually loops, all the way to choosing a non-sec…

Post by discmonkey » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 1:55 PM UTC

Post by wsc981 » Mon, Aug 02, 2021, 1:56 PM UTC

cbm-vic-20 wrote: post #653

woofie11 wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretend there's a Programming Quotient (PQ) which is like IQ. Let's say Google would like candidates with PQ>130 with 95% confidence. Google has an error with std. div. of 15 points in measurement of PQ in jobs interviews. Google then needs to set the hiring bar at 160 PQ in order to get those candidates. This: - screens most qualified candidates out; but - most candidates who do screen in are qualified Statistics wo…

> all Googlers are convinced they all have a PQ>160, and are superior to everyone else. And likewise, other employers looking to hire ex-Googlers are convinced of the same.