351–360 of 833 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People get PIP’ed and fired routinely that make it through this process. I think there’s a lot of bias in your response. The process worked for you, you work at a large tech company and it gives you validation. It also makes you feel good to lord over the process and boosts your ego, reinforcing your priors.
What is PIP?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People get PIP’ed and fired routinely that make it through this process. I think there’s a lot of bias in your response. The process worked for you, you work at a large tech company and it gives you validation. It also makes you feel good to lord over the process and boosts your ego, reinforcing your priors.
What is PIP?
Having been an interviewer at a FAANG for many years, I can explain some of the logic behind it. I'm not saying this logic is valid , but it's how we got here, imho. First: we no longer trust the hiring manager alone, because probably they aren't a strong developer. We instead trust strong developers that are well trained at evaluating good devs. At the same time, we don't want to thrust a dev onto a hiring manager,…
> First: we no longer trust the hiring manager alone, because probably they aren't a strong developer This is a huge problem IMHO. I topped out at L7 on the FAANG EM track, but that’s dozens of ICs and a few EMs in your org and I still think you need to be able to build the software and review diffs and write serious ones now and again. Clearly this is now only part of your job, not the focus of it, but it’s very dif…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People get PIP’ed and fired routinely that make it through this process. I think there’s a lot of bias in your response. The process worked for you, you work at a large tech company and it gives you validation. It also makes you feel good to lord over the process and boosts your ego, reinforcing your priors.
What is PIP?
It's normal. A company that doesn't do this, unless it's tiny, is a warning sign. Why? Short answer: It's very difficult to work with incompetent colleagues colleagues. Long answer: We don't rely on a credentialing process like other fields do. Some people lie on their resumes or embellish their skills. Other people overestimate their skills. As a result, employers have to determine competence in the interview proces…
I worked at a household name non-tech company and we negotiated such a deal. It worked great.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People get PIP’ed and fired routinely that make it through this process. I think there’s a lot of bias in your response. The process worked for you, you work at a large tech company and it gives you validation. It also makes you feel good to lord over the process and boosts your ego, reinforcing your priors.
Quoted post unavailable.
Take home interviews are horrible if you are interviewing for more than one company at a time. It will take a lot of time if you are serious about it, and it will test you much more on how much you dedicate yourself to the problem than on what's your actual skill.
Also the fewer interviews there are, more is the importance of subjective and unjust metrics. I received offers from large (and somewhat good) companies with 1-2 interviews because of my resume. Although I personally benefitted from that, I think it brings a lot of problems for people who went to bad universities/companies, and that is not worth it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Sort the array. Then use two indexes, one on each side of the array. Increment indexes to meet in the middle. This is one of those tricks you just have to memorize and it's very hard to come up with the solution in 30 min.
But why didn't you use the O(n) solution instead of the O(n log n) solution?
> How is a process like this in any way shape or form efficient or productive? Because hiring the wrong person becomes a colossal waste of time and money.
That's only because you spent thousands having candidates go through 7 interviews.
And then, as others have said, there's the cost of the people who look at your hiring process and decide that they won't bother to try to jump through your hoops. Hint: They are not the least valuable candidates.