The real reason you can't hire developers.... • Hacker News Board

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#191

Post by jerhewet » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:24 PM UTC

fuzzythinker wrote: post #26

Counter data: semi-active search time span: ~4-5 weeks where: just craigslist & python.org what: sr. level web frontend or backend companies: all small/startups, but none are well known in HN emails sent: I'm quite choosy actually, only applied to ~4 positions a week, which equates to ~20 sent. results: ~75-80% replied, out of those replied: ~50-60% replied within a day or two, 2 took more than a week to get back to…

Interesting points. Possibly a strong correlation to where you're located vs. the original poster?

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#192

Post by ryspeers » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:25 PM UTC

jemfinch wrote: post #126

I'm going to say it because it seems no one else is. I apologize ahead of time for my brutal honesty. You need to consider the possibility that you're not as competent as you believe yourself to be. Dunning-Kruger[0] is real, and your post doesn't demonstrate the self-awareness the best developers seem to possess. Your writing is sprinkled with emoticons and rife with reduplicated punctuation, both of which (especial…

Bravo.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#193

Post by jrockway » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:25 PM UTC

mgkimsal wrote: post #20

Hrm... I tend to agree with the OPs thoughts - companies often don't respond, even when, in general, the industry (and perhaps some of those same companies) publicly moan about not being able to find people. When did having 7 years of experience make someone a sr level developer? I don't think I started using that level for myself until I had 10 years experience. I guess to each his own. Just like everyone's a "found…

Senior, these days, means something like "I can create a working computer program without any auto-inserted boilerplate".

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#194

Post by wyclif » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:29 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #187

geebee wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

another thing that irritates me about these claims of a shortage is that almost all of the companies doing the hiring take pride in their challenging interview process and acknowledge a high rate of "false negatives" - ie., that that they are very conservative about making an offer, and that this does result in a "no offer" to developers who probably would have worked out. I made this point in a previous thread, and…

I disagree. I've interviewed people that failed on our rather easy interview questions but had other redeeming qualities. We ended up hiring these people and nobody has ever turned out well; it would have been better to have no position than to have them. My new rule is, "would I go into business with this person". If not, no hire. Sorry.

It seems to me that the unspoken issue here is the dichotomy between founder and employee. Not every employee is going to be someone of whom you would say "I would go into business with this person." While I agree that companies should keep standards high, at some point (and I would maintain that point is not very far out on the curve) if you can only hire people you'd form a business with you are going to hit a wall when it comes to growing your company.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#195

Post by efsavage » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:30 PM UTC

bigohms wrote: post #157

jebblue wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Dunning-Kruger" "doesn't demonstrate the self-awareness the best developers seem to possess" "requisite introspective capability" "I do interviews" Really? Do you pay bills with your code? "To put it bluntly" "you're less competent than you think you are" To put it bluntly you sound like a pretentious arse.

And looking back on the posters comment history, I would tend to agree. There is tons of absolutes, argumentation and quite a lack of tact.

Maybe I'm similar, but I can say that based on comments I've seen here I'd be far more likely to email jemfinch back than up_and_up.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#196

Post by PthorStorm » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:32 PM UTC

MartinCron wrote: post #150

up_and_up wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big point: Salary was not included in my initial contact email. That means only 5/50 companies even knew what I was looking for. "I expect to get paid $115K to lead a team as a senior developer, but don't want to relocate in order to be with the team" I forgot to add, 50% of the positions I applied to gave salary range of 80-130K. Also, I state I am willing to relocate eventually. All the positions claimed to be open…

I state I am willing to relocate eventually. Even though the positions claim to be open to telecommuting, a lot of people (like myself) may have a strong bias for local talent. It's just profoundly easier overall.

Telecommuting is a lie. It is not easier than being local or even commuting more than an hour one-way, unless the weather is too bad to make it on a particular day. The biggest reason that telecommuting doesn't work is due to being part of the team. You really can't get to know the team without being in the same office with them. Maybe after you get to know the team, and how to communicate effectively with each of the members you could do it. I believe it is just a waste otherwise.

However, if you are working as a lone developer on a project without a team, then it could work just fine. In that case, why are you hitching yourself to a single company though?

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#197

Post by geebee » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:35 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #187

geebee wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

another thing that irritates me about these claims of a shortage is that almost all of the companies doing the hiring take pride in their challenging interview process and acknowledge a high rate of "false negatives" - ie., that that they are very conservative about making an offer, and that this does result in a "no offer" to developers who probably would have worked out. I made this point in a previous thread, and…

I disagree. I've interviewed people that failed on our rather easy interview questions but had other redeeming qualities. We ended up hiring these people and nobody has ever turned out well; it would have been better to have no position than to have them. My new rule is, "would I go into business with this person". If not, no hire. Sorry.

When I wrote "Sure, it may be worth it - I certainly think it's worth it", I intended to communicate that I think it's worth putting up with a high number of false negatives to avoid really bad hires... so I think we actually are in complete agreement on this point.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#198

Post by j_baker » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:37 PM UTC

jemfinch wrote: post #126

I'm going to say it because it seems no one else is. I apologize ahead of time for my brutal honesty. You need to consider the possibility that you're not as competent as you believe yourself to be. Dunning-Kruger[0] is real, and your post doesn't demonstrate the self-awareness the best developers seem to possess. Your writing is sprinkled with emoticons and rife with reduplicated punctuation, both of which (especial…

While we're waxing psychological, I should also point out the Just World bias[1]. Sometimes, capable people have difficulty getting jobs they're qualified for due to reasons outside their control. And having been on both sides of the table, I can say that identifying good developers is hardly a precise science (I mean, you're judging him based on emoticons and whether you see any token modesty), and many if not most people who are genuinely great at software development are terrible at demonstrating it.

Also, you need to consider the possibility that the author doesn't show any signs of self-reflection because he/she is so frustrated. I've spent 3 months looking for a job all the while seeing people complaining about how hard it is to find developers, and it is incredibly frustrating.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#199

Post by thoughtsimple » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:38 PM UTC

karmajunkie wrote: post #153

thoughtsimple wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had an interview with a company that involved 6 people interviewing me serially. That sort of thing is grueling in the best of cases. But this one went south with the third interviewer. He seemed to me be someone with something like Aspergers syndrome. He talked in a monotone, fidgeted constantly and was rocking back and forth. While I have no problem working with anyone technically competent, this person…

perhaps he was working from #7 on joel's interview questions: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000073.html

That's interesting because I think the interviewer was unintentionally doing this. But the problem was that I couldn't have a conversation with him. He just kept on telling me I was wrong with no discussion. I didn't give in. He never changed his answer or tone. When I say monotone, I'm not kidding.

So if he was trying to use Joel's technique, shouldn't he have at least engaged in a conversation? If he was doing it, he was doing it very badly. I'm pretty persuasive when it comes to technical issues. I'm frequently wrong and lose many a battle but I win them too at least as often as I lose. I can tell you I wasn't getting any feedback that he was interested in resolving the conflict. Just that he wanted me to acknowledge that he was right. He wasn't.

If the goal was to challenge me, it backfired. After this incident I had little interest in continuing the interview. It turned me off on the company pretty conclusively. And then I was angry because I felt my time had been wasted. Not a good outcome for me or them.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#200

Post by thoughtsimple » Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 9:40 PM UTC

gherlein wrote: post #165

thoughtsimple wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had an interview with a company that involved 6 people interviewing me serially. That sort of thing is grueling in the best of cases. But this one went south with the third interviewer. He seemed to me be someone with something like Aspergers syndrome. He talked in a monotone, fidgeted constantly and was rocking back and forth. While I have no problem working with anyone technically competent, this person…

Have you considered that maybe him telling you that you were wrong was a ruse to see how you handled disagreements? I use this technique sometimes myself.

Of course, it was my first instinct. It became clear quite quickly that this wasn't the case. He believed he was correct and was uninterested in having a conversation.