Honestly the only thing I see out of this is that Dropbox is a huge paying customer of this service.
We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
11–20 of 234 posts
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#12Looks like Dropbox has trouble retaining tech talent?
Or simply that they have significant bias in their interview process for selecting candidates with strong interview skills. At that point it’s tautological—if you only select people who ace interviews then you’ll have a bunch of people who ace interviews.
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#13I think people put too much effort and time in this whole interview business. My suggestion, based on my experience, is to spend a reasonable time like a month, brushing up on most common data structures and algo. Then just take your chances. Rinse and repeat.
Depends on your goal, some people want as many high offers as they can to drive up their comp even higher.
When you're young it might be worth it but to me the cost/benefit isn't worth spending months over preparing.
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#14I think people put too much effort and time in this whole interview business. My suggestion, based on my experience, is to spend a reasonable time like a month, brushing up on most common data structures and algo. Then just take your chances. Rinse and repeat.
I have exactly the opposite opinion, for couple of reasons:
1. interviews are black boxes - there's no feedback; getting feedback from a professional interviewer is the best way to understand one's weaknesses
2. dealing with pressure in simulated environment can help (a lot, for some) to handle pressure in a real one.
I had no idea, for example, why I didn't fare well in a certain type of interview, until I did a mock one.
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#15The fallacy to these findings and conclusions is that you're measuring processes of your own brand and flavor; the biases are so deep you likely don't recognize them. 'technical', 'problem solving', 'communication' these are all of your own construction, setting, presentation and scoring. Look at the failings of the IQ test for example.
I'm curious if people just really need to learn the talk and the walk of a silicon valley employee to land a job at a FAANG.
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#16It would be interesting to show error bars on the graphs. Seeing 95% confidence intervals would give a much better idea of whether we're looking at meaningful signal or just noise
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#17Looks like Dropbox has trouble retaining tech talent?
Author here. We didn't publish a histogram showing how many users we have from each company, so I guess you'll have to trust me on this one. Dropbox has waaaay fewer engineers on interviewing.io per capita than some of the other companies... many of whom didn't make the top ten list. In our experience, they're quite good at retaining talent.
Doesn't this exact comment undercut your results fairly heavily?
You're admitting that it's much more likely dropbox is a statistical anomaly because of fewer data points, rather than a robust data set.
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#18Looks like Dropbox has trouble retaining tech talent?
Author here. We didn't publish a histogram showing how many users we have from each company, so I guess you'll have to trust me on this one. Dropbox has waaaay fewer engineers on interviewing.io per capita than some of the other companies... many of whom didn't make the top ten list. In our experience, they're quite good at retaining talent.
[deleted]
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#19I would never want the best developers. Imagine the giant pain in the back of these primadonna always thinking they can get paid more in their next job. And how you should give them this or that, or how you should change your development stack, language, processes, chair color, etc. I only need very few geniuses and a lot of normal ones. 80/20, remember?!
Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work
#20I think people put too much effort and time in this whole interview business. My suggestion, based on my experience, is to spend a reasonable time like a month, brushing up on most common data structures and algo. Then just take your chances. Rinse and repeat.
I think interview practice with real interviewers and expert feedback is an excellent investment.