Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

blog.interviewing.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 234 posts

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#171

Post by ummonk »

dasil003 wrote: post #119
stale2002 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's the assumption that the results have any real world validity Of course it has real world validity. It has real world validity regarding how well people are likely to do in tech interviews. You can feel free to say that the way the tech industry does interviews is bad, or biased, or has all sorts of problems. But having vague measurements, such as "technical" or "communication" skills sounds very accurate to ho…

The moral outrage is because of Goodhart's Law. Over the last 22 years I've interviewed hundreds, hired and directly managed probably close to 100 individuals in widely varying environments, ranging from a 25k employee state university, to startups of various shapes and sizes, to the hottest SV IPO of 2020. The reason for interview practices to be the way they are is to raise the floor for FAANG, who have high intern…

All I can say is that in my experience the average programmer at a company with a highly selective FAANG-style interview process is far sharper than the average programmer in the industry as a whole. Additionally, managers at more selective companies tend to be less parochial and less micro-managing.

The process isn't perfect, and it has some type I errors and a lot of type II errors, but it's a lot better than just throwing darts at a stack of resumes.

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#172

Post by ummonk »

junon wrote: post #131
leeny wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Author here. Yes, the skills are left to the interpretation of the interviewer, but most of our interviewers are senior engineers at FAANG. We've done quite a bit of work internally to make sure your interviewers are well calibrated, and we have a living calibration score for each one (calibration is based on how the interviewees they interview end up doing in real interviews). The interviews in question are a mix of…

> senior engineers at FAANG This means absolutely nothing. It's a well known fact that SV titles hold next to no weight.

If only someone had told all the recruiters who didn't start hitting me up until I had a FAANG on my resume.

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#174

Post by coryrc »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #170
overrun11 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It perpetuates the myth that there's something really special about Silicon Valley engineers Why are you sure it's a myth? My prior would be to believe that engineers at the most exclusive companies with the highest hiring bars that pay 3-5 times more than average would be better programmers. The article is just one data point confirming what intuitively should be true. If Silicon Valley engineers are no better tha…

There are capable people who don't want to live where 1000sqft home costs $1M. Never mind all of the other problems with the region. Selection bias doesn't prove anything about the people you aren't selecting for.

If houses only cost twice your gross salary, that sounds affordable to me!

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#175

Post by [deleted] »

subsubzero wrote: post #77

Dropbox was known as a hard place to interview since 2014, the tech companies that had the hardest technical interviews are Quora, Palantir and Dropbox(honorable mention fog creek)(this was from a few years back so things may have changed). Just because the company makes it extremely difficult to get in does not mean the company is generally all around awesome or pays great or employs the greatest engineers. It optim…

[deleted]

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#176

Post by zaptheimpaler »

kieselguhr_kid wrote: post #106
stale2002 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's the assumption that the results have any real world validity Of course it has real world validity. It has real world validity regarding how well people are likely to do in tech interviews. You can feel free to say that the way the tech industry does interviews is bad, or biased, or has all sorts of problems. But having vague measurements, such as "technical" or "communication" skills sounds very accurate to ho…

It doesn't necessarily say anything other than "where you work now has some predictive value for how well you'll be perceived by interviewers" in which case these aren't "top performers", they're "people with jobs" and it's just regurgitating a truism about how it's easier to get a job if you have a job. I'm not buying this as a moral outrage question, I'm wondering if this is adding anything meaningful for us to loo…

Except that interviewing.io interviews are specifically designed to be anonymous. This is even stated on their website. The interviewers do not see a resume or job history. As a candidate who's done a couple of interviews through them, the interviewers never asked anything about my background either. I don't recall even uploading a resume.

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#177

Post by b20000 »

overrun11 wrote: post #160
TrackerFF wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak for myself, but I've never met a (CS) candidate from an accredited Scandinavian university / college that simply could not write code. There are obviously candidates that struggle with performing under pressure - even those that have gone completely blank, but through some simple guiding have bounced back. To be frank, at the schools I studied at, it would be impossible to fake your way through a who…

Maybe Scandinavian countries have more rigorous degree programs. If so they are fairly unique in that regard. I don't see how we can use that during hiring thought. What are tech companies supposed to do: only hire from these universities? That seems less fair than the current process.

how so? you are rewarding students for working hard to get their degree? the current process basically tells them: we don’t care you worked crazy hard, it’s back to square 1. they might just as well gone straight into an internship after high school…

also: this is not just the case for scandinavian universities but also the case for universities in most of western europe especially if they are non-private.

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#178

Post by b20000 »

overrun11 wrote: post #163
b20000 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, where i graduated, people DID have those skills. so you are wrong. besides, companies already ask what university you went to and could get your records and individual class grades and use that combined with number of people fired that had the same degree to figure out if they want to hire you or not. after all, we are in the era of data science? and instead of paying recruiters lots of money for shuffling word…

You end up with a far less merit based hiring pipeline. I work at a top tech company and don't have any degree at all. The current process gives people like me a chance, yours wouldn't.

the current process rewards people who memorize and grind leetcode answers, rather than those with an actual education and skills, which is a problem. so no, the current process is not merit based but rather measures to what extent you are willing to exhaust yourself to get a job.

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#179

Post by oneepic »

calchris42 wrote: post #126

Despite all the caveats / problems on statistical significance and methodology, 1 key takeaway: “Unemployed” engineers communicate better than those at Uber, Twitter, Amazon, and Google. :)

Not to mention every other company outside of the top 10.

Re: We analyzed 100K technical interviews to see where the best performers work

#180

Post by b20000 »

overrun11 wrote: post #158
b20000 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the process is incredibly inefficient and disrespectful. people have already paid for university degrees and getting a degree is no joke, certainly not at a european university. graduating without programming skills is impossible. what companies should do is ask you to walk them through a piece of code of your choice and discuss that and/or hire you for a month as a contractor and pay you a fair market rate.

> hire you for a month as a contractor and pay you a fair market rate. Huge risk for anyone who currently has a job. I'd much rather the technical interview.

what risk? companies already pay crazy fees to recruiters. just give the cash to the prospects.
Post reply on HN