Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens • Hacker News Board

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#271

Post by Jach » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:01 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #244

Jach wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love this because I agree 100%. I accepted the idea that they were "out there" but only really internalized it after I interviewed someone with a Masters in physics who couldn't make any progress on my simple problem. (The problem does assume you can understand the concept of a geometric line, but I give the two line equations most people first run into in junior high, among other things, I'm not testing recall.) E…

On the “we can take a chance here” front, I’ve sometimes struggled with hiring someone out of a stable situation and putting them into a role where they might earn a termination. If someone’s already unemployed and that happens, they’re no worse off (and likely better off). If it happens that they resigned a stable job and that happens, they’re made worse off. As a hiring manager or interviewer, I’m not their fiducia…

Yeah, it's trickier when they're coming in with an existing job, and the current professional quitting culture dictates that you couldn't start any time sooner than in two weeks at least. Add that to the list of difficulties involved in lower time-to-start dates.

I've been fortunate (or not) that the hiring decisions I've played a part in have all been non-urgent with no struggle to find more candidates, so in the face of risk the org could afford to wait. The moral hazard you describe is interesting though. I don't think I would worry about it, as you say the hiring side isn't their fiduciary, and you don't necessarily know that their current situation is all that stable. I might try and assure myself that even if things don't work out, they're unlikely to be put out on the streets, since if they got past us (even with our "risky" assessment) they can probably get past someone else quickly enough, and possibly even go back to where they left depending on how stable it really was.

I'd consider being honest with them about the risk if an offer is extended. If I were on the receiving end, I'd prefer to be told before I accept something along the lines of "Honestly we're a bit unsure how well you'll adapt to our work [because of risk factors x], but we see your potential and think you'll rise to the occasion. We hope you'll come join us!" I don't think having my risk factors pointed out would affect me negatively at all, even if I think they're BS things the company shouldn't worry about, though I can see it possibly affecting the company somewhat negatively in that they're potentially giving the candidate who all-in-all they think is worth taking a chance on an extra reason to decline (and thus they'll need to continue searching which sucks). Whether that decline happens really depends on the candidate. With that information they might conclude/agree it's too risky to leave their current role for you right now, or they might actually be motivated to do better and start proving themselves right from the start especially at a company that is so forthcoming about such things. And they might fail, but at least they leave with the knowledge of what went wrong, and even if what went wrong wasn't an identified risk factor they still have your list of risk factors (some possibly valid, some BS, some that can be worked on, some that can't) that other companies might be looking out for to have for future interviews.

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#272

Post by sokoloff » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:02 PM UTC

Mezzie wrote: post #270

sokoloff wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the “we can take a chance here” front, I’ve sometimes struggled with hiring someone out of a stable situation and putting them into a role where they might earn a termination. If someone’s already unemployed and that happens, they’re no worse off (and likely better off). If it happens that they resigned a stable job and that happens, they’re made worse off. As a hiring manager or interviewer, I’m not their fiducia…

Could you indicate it through your choice of interview questions? Things like, "How do you feel about stretching your skills in the work force?" "What do you do when you make a mistake at work?" "How do you handle a situation where you feel out of your depth?" Etc.? I know I would take that as a signal not to go for it if I wanted to retain stability in my life.

That's a great thought; however, we most often discover the conflict during the hiring debrief when we have mixed feedback on a candidate leaving the candidate "on the bubble".

It does give me some ideas to consider when we extend the offer (as @Jach's sibling comment also suggests).

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#273

Post by detaro » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:04 PM UTC

vanusa wrote: post #269

nijave wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of candidates don't have public repos and you need an equal comparison across all candidates (you can introduce a lot of bias trying to gauge two candidates against different sets of criteria)

A lot of candidates don't have public repos It doesn't have to be a public repo of course. They can just send zip file. You need an equal comparison across all candidates. "We'd like to see a code sample -- something we can build and compile, that you feel is representative of your skill level." Sounds pretty straightforward and egalitarian to me.

I'm curious, if we exclude all your open-source work (assuming you have some), what did/would you submit when given the question?

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#274

Post by oneepic » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

heavenlyblue wrote: post #250

oneepic wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was the candidate, and you informed me the interview would be recorded with video, I would politely thank you for your time and end the call.

Why? It could easily be optional by the way. I would be ok with the recording as long as they don’t make my sign the form allowing it to be used as part of some public campaign.

I'm not comfortable with the idea of being recorded, especially when I'm already under the pressure of an interview. I don't know how they'll use my video, if it will be used in training, leaked, etc. I might never see that company again, but they could use my video forever without me knowing.

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#275

Post by Mezzie » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

JackMorgan wrote: post #161

Jensson wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today's interview process seems eminently gameable by grinding LeetCode and watching YouTube videos on system design. That is a feature. You look at what they worked on before to see if they are senior material. Then you do leetcode and system design to see if they are smart. A smart person would most likely learn whatever tech and problems they worked on, so if they do well on leetcode you just assume they did wel…

As a former director of engineering who has hired many great developers and many terrible ones, I can safely say that grinding leetcode isn't a valid signal for smart, just for conformity, ego, and time. Some of the worst developers I know could crush leetcode all day. Yes, it's an easy signal, it makes an unpredictable and messy process feel neat and binary. However, it is a false signal, and no amount of personal c…

> Unfortunately, software productivity is never going to be measurable. Therefore we will never ever have a reliable metric to even prove to ourselves that we are more or less productive than our coworkers, much less worth hiring. This fact should sober our prideful arrogance about hiring and introduce some humility. Our best practices are a farce with absolutely zero data to back up their validity. Ask yourselves where are the studies that prove candidates who crush leetcode perform better than those who couldn't? Where is the double blind research?

I think there is something similar to art in GOOD software development, as somebody who does both. The primary reason I don't like coding for a living is the same reason I don't like writing fiction for a living: I really dislike being creative on demand and on a schedule. I find it stressful. I can't make myself get a story idea any more than I can make myself find an elegant solution to a coding issue. Sitting and staring at the screen more isn't going to solve the issue for me.

Software development is to math/CS what painting is to color theory. There is science, but there's also creation. That's why it's so hard to measure and hire for. Imagine trying to judge 1000 newly graduated oil painters who had all taken the exact same classes. How would you decide who was 'best'?

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#276

Post by moneywoes » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:22 PM UTC

JackMorgan wrote: post #161

Jensson wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today's interview process seems eminently gameable by grinding LeetCode and watching YouTube videos on system design. That is a feature. You look at what they worked on before to see if they are senior material. Then you do leetcode and system design to see if they are smart. A smart person would most likely learn whatever tech and problems they worked on, so if they do well on leetcode you just assume they did wel…

As a former director of engineering who has hired many great developers and many terrible ones, I can safely say that grinding leetcode isn't a valid signal for smart, just for conformity, ego, and time. Some of the worst developers I know could crush leetcode all day. Yes, it's an easy signal, it makes an unpredictable and messy process feel neat and binary. However, it is a false signal, and no amount of personal c…

I agree wholeheartedly. However, what is the alternative?

There are way too many developers out there and too few jobs

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#277

Post by runnerup » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:25 PM UTC

heavenlyblue wrote: post #250

oneepic wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was the candidate, and you informed me the interview would be recorded with video, I would politely thank you for your time and end the call.

Why? It could easily be optional by the way. I would be ok with the recording as long as they don’t make my sign the form allowing it to be used as part of some public campaign.

I was offered an interview which would be recording myself to get graded by AI software: https://startupleague.online/blog/vempathy-tech-scalable-use...

If I thought my interview was being recorded, I'd assume it was being used for this internally. If given the option to have it recorded, I'd assume that I'd get "minus points" for declining.

This is very unfortunate, because I love your idea. I'd just need stronger legal protections to ensure that I wasn't perpetuating part of a dystopia.

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#278

Post by quietbritishjim » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:32 PM UTC

Supermancho wrote: post #115

wiseowise wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather filter out good candidate than let bad in. It's a domino effect. You let one bad, he will hire more in the future.

> You let one bad, he will hire more in the future. When your organization can recognize a poor investment but cannot act on it, you have an organizational problem. Why would someone get to hire more "bad" (for whatever that means) if you can recognize it? Even if you're doing all the hiring yourself, it's unlikely you'll have a 100% record over time.

For one thing, in many countries it's hard to get rid of a poor employee unless they're malicious or really exceptionally terrible.

For another, even if "an organisational problem" or inconvenient labour laws don't get in your way, firing employees can have a serious effect on the morale of those left behind. And for good reason! Usually companies that regularly fire people for poor performance has a different sort of culture than companies that don't. In my experience, that's the worse organisational problem.

The right solution is just to be more careful about who you hire in the first place.

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#279

Post by kevinburke » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:33 PM UTC

jcoder wrote: post #257

I was in agreement with most of the article, but the final footnote came out of left field for me: 7. I have a bunch of ideas around testing how quickly and how accurately people can type, or accurately transcribe text from a second screen, that I think could be decent predictors of job performance but I'm not sure are fair to test out in a professional context without academic research that could validate them at le…

Attention to detail and recall, mainly, but again I don’t think you can justify screening for it at all without additional academic research.

Re: Ten years of experience, still failing phone screens

#280

Post by vanusa » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:36 PM UTC

creamytaco wrote: post #254

vanusa wrote: post #2

This post ought to be the final nail on the coffin of the cult of leetcode/whiteboard style inverviewing. Just looking at this guy's repo and his writing style -- you'd be foolish to waste his time or yours on leetcode-style hazing. Your conversation should be strictly high-level. If you must, pick a file at random from one his larger projects, and ask a few straightforward quetions ("I'm new to Go - can you explain…

Your post ought to be ample proof that subjective opinions (like the one you display here) are not solid grounds for hiring decisions. When looking at this person's Github page, I -unlike you- see a vast number of trivial projects that can best be described as regurgitations of other people's work. Even worse, if you actually look at his first pinned project ( https://github.com/kevinburke/nacl ), you'll see that it…

I never said you should just hire someone on the basis of their repo.

But rather, if you're looking for a basic smoke test which can answer the question "Can this person actually code? Do I want to spend more time engaging them?" -- there are better ways to do that than expecting them to cram on a list of algorithms to recite over the phone. Like looking at an actual work sample.

The fact that you looked at this work sample -- and came to your own conclusion about whether they would be worth engaging -- validates this very simple and basic point.

Which is your call of course. He may not meet your bar, but it would be absurd to say this guy can't code, and hasn't been around the block in terms of general CS concepts.

That said -- my own subjective opinion is that you're being exquisitely savage in your assessment of his NaCl implementation. Yeah, it's wrapper -- like it says in the Readme, and like a lot of working code out there. It's a pretty established way of solving a problem, in fact -- in some cases a very efficient and elegant way. It's not the same thing as writing 20k of primitives from scratch, of course. But that's not what he's presenting it as. He's not saying it's a "tour de force". He's saying "I think this shows we can talk about other things besides FizzBuzz".

And then other things you're like saying... like "an anti-project"? Wow.