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

Recruiting programmers to your startup

cdixon.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#21

Post by cletus »

One big problem I see is the disparity between the treatment of cofounders and early engineers.

Late stage employees will almost certainly will almost certainly do (financially) better by working at Google or Facebook. I've seen th polls here where people talk about their exits and apart from a handful who essentially win the lottery, you'd predictably get more and work less at one of these two.

But why is it the last cofounder may get 30%+ with preferential shares and the first engineer gets 1% or less shortly thereafter?

It seems like an anachronism from the dot-com era when startup costs were much higher.

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#22

Post by kls »

greenEggsNHam wrote: post #20
kls wrote: post #4

If the candidate has enough free time try to do a trial project. There are also more procedural things that can be useful like code tests (although they need to be done in a respectful way and they are more about getting to know how each side thinks than actually testing whether the candidate knows how to program (hopefully you know that by this stage)). I have come to the point where I respectfully decline to take t…

I'm confident you're a solid coder, which is the same benefit of the doubt I give any interviewee I meet with. However, if you dismiss any opportunity that asks you to perform a test to exhibits your skills, then your process is fraught with false positives. Has it occurred to you that perhaps you might like the company/opportunity even though you're given an exam? You took the time to research the company and show u…

then your process is fraught with false positives

I contend that if you test me you will get a false negative. Becase you are testing me on what you think I should know which is a reflection of your strengths not mine.

Has it occurred to you that perhaps you might like the company/opportunity even though you're given an exam?

Yes it has, the problem is that I now belive that they don't know how to hire and I will be working with a group of people that know trivia but may not know how to deliver. As such it will fall on me to deliver becase their hiring process has not shown an ephisis on selecting people that can deliver.

the interviewer wants to make sure that you truly are capable of performing the way you represent yourself on paper.

I feel that, my and others capibilities are best reflected in what I have already done. We don't ask a other professionals to take test we look at their history and accomplishments.

But what if you weren't a good coder, and only a good talker?

A good talker can BS someone with no knowledge of the field. They are not going to be able to BS their way through an entire code base. A skilled technical person will catch on.

I don't think companies that do test are terrible I just think their interview process is lacking as such it can leave me holding the bag with long hours becase they cannot identify other good talent. It's from experience that I have come to the conclusion that hireing via test is a useless filter, because at one point in time I was the worst offender. I used to use elite code trick questions, abstract questions and code tests and I found not only where they ineffective but I was actually driving the best individuals away, due to what they perceived as arrogance on the part of my orginizarion. Developers have little tolarance for things that seem inefficient and pointless. It took me a while to learn that lesson.

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#23

Post by Timothee »

cletus wrote: post #21

One big problem I see is the disparity between the treatment of cofounders and early engineers. Late stage employees will almost certainly will almost certainly do (financially) better by working at Google or Facebook. I've seen th polls here where people talk about their exits and apart from a handful who essentially win the lottery, you'd predictably get more and work less at one of these two. But why is it the las…

It seems like an anachronism from the dot-com era when startup costs were much higher.

I'm not even sure how that justified the situation then. Unless founders were to bring their own money.

Do you mean that in the sense that it's now much easier for a programmer to build their own stuff, thus they might as well work for themselves rather than getting tiny equity for someone else?

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#24

Post by mjwalshe »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #15
aaronblohowiak wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most businesses won't/can't effectively use remote developers.

Explain? I've worked remotely for 20 years, and its working great. For startups, established companies, as a consulatant.

true but notfor a start up or a proper RAD/DSDM project - co located teams in the same building /room is the way to go

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#25

Post by mjwalshe »

kls wrote: post #22
greenEggsNHam wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confident you're a solid coder, which is the same benefit of the doubt I give any interviewee I meet with. However, if you dismiss any opportunity that asks you to perform a test to exhibits your skills, then your process is fraught with false positives. Has it occurred to you that perhaps you might like the company/opportunity even though you're given an exam? You took the time to research the company and show u…

then your process is fraught with false positives I contend that if you test me you will get a false negative. Becase you are testing me on what you think I should know which is a reflection of your strengths not mine. Has it occurred to you that perhaps you might like the company/opportunity even though you're given an exam? Yes it has, the problem is that I now belive that they don't know how to hire and I will be…

Good point doing the fancy stuff is easy making it work 24/7 and do all the nasty fiddly little bits you gloss over is the hard stuff.

You want to be sure the figures add up when you do your first million pound month when the CTO (i think that Vint was his boss at the time) nudges you and says "this had better be right or we are both out of a job"

of course this was back 1983 so that is say $4,250,000 in today's money.

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#26

Post by cletus »

Timothee wrote: post #23
cletus wrote: post #21

One big problem I see is the disparity between the treatment of cofounders and early engineers. Late stage employees will almost certainly will almost certainly do (financially) better by working at Google or Facebook. I've seen th polls here where people talk about their exits and apart from a handful who essentially win the lottery, you'd predictably get more and work less at one of these two. But why is it the las…

It seems like an anachronism from the dot-com era when startup costs were much higher. I'm not even sure how that justified the situation then. Unless founders were to bring their own money. Do you mean that in the sense that it's now much easier for a programmer to build their own stuff, thus they might as well work for themselves rather than getting tiny equity for someone else?

Meaning the ability to raise money was a prerequisite in the dot-com era because without money you had nothing so your ability to raise money elevated you to founder.

Now bootstrapping or a small amount of angel funding can go a long way so equity models (IMHO) need to evolve if startups want to attract top talent, especially considering a joB at Google could easily net you $200k+ in total comp (and far more than that for top talent) with far lower risk.

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#27

Post by andrewflnr »

Timothee wrote: post #6
juddlyon wrote: post #2

This reference is golden: "Post-traction companies can use the old numbers – you can’t. Your first two engineers? They’re just late founders. Treat them as such. Expect as much." Another point he addresses that rings true to me: programmer's motivation. I've made the mistake of throwing money at people when all they wanted was some more leeway to hack.

Regarding the equity, it's interesting to see how prevalent "ideas are worthless, execution is everything" is, while, when a company hires their first engineers, they're typically not far off from being just an idea. Still, the typical equity compensation is far from reflecting that.

Isn't equity just payment in advance for execution, though? It makes perfect sense to me.

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#28

Post by jwegan »

kls wrote: post #22
greenEggsNHam wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confident you're a solid coder, which is the same benefit of the doubt I give any interviewee I meet with. However, if you dismiss any opportunity that asks you to perform a test to exhibits your skills, then your process is fraught with false positives. Has it occurred to you that perhaps you might like the company/opportunity even though you're given an exam? You took the time to research the company and show u…

then your process is fraught with false positives I contend that if you test me you will get a false negative. Becase you are testing me on what you think I should know which is a reflection of your strengths not mine. Has it occurred to you that perhaps you might like the company/opportunity even though you're given an exam? Yes it has, the problem is that I now belive that they don't know how to hire and I will be…

They are not going to be able to BS their way through an entire code base.

The problem is that a large number of coders out there simply do not have a project they can show an interviewer. This can be for a number of reasons such as only programming at work or not having much free time. The fact a coder has a project to walk someone through does not imply they are a good coder, so why would a company tailor their interview process to the minority of interview candidates out there who do have a sizable project they can demo?

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#29

Post by droithomme »

This is basically a rehash of the usual article on the topic that says the same things and is published every couple months.

One twist was notable. Rather than try to compete on basic hygenic issues and market realities, the advice is to just give up:

"[Y]ou will never beat, say, Google on perks or job security so don’t even bother to pitch those. You’ll never beat Wall Street banks or rich big companies on cash salary so don’t pitch that either"

First, this assumes you are hiring people who are choosing between your company, Google and top Wall Street jobs. That seems unlikely. Very few people want to work on Wall Street and not that many are applying simultaneously to Google and some random company that you or I are running.

Second, you absolutely can't hire top talent by not being competitive with salary, by which I mean 75th percentile or higher. The competent people are like 1% of the job pool out there and have plenty of choices.

You also can't attract top talent by not offering standard benefits. You just can't.

Advocating that you shouldn't bother with competitive pay or benefits is obviously poor advice. So one must ask what is going on here, why is this being advocated? We can't really know. Perhaps the author is trying to justify the low pay and poor benefits his company offers.

Re: Recruiting programmers to your startup

#30

Post by kls »

jwegan wrote: post #28
kls wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

then your process is fraught with false positives I contend that if you test me you will get a false negative. Becase you are testing me on what you think I should know which is a reflection of your strengths not mine. Has it occurred to you that perhaps you might like the company/opportunity even though you're given an exam? Yes it has, the problem is that I now belive that they don't know how to hire and I will be…

They are not going to be able to BS their way through an entire code base. The problem is that a large number of coders out there simply do not have a project they can show an interviewer. This can be for a number of reasons such as only programming at work or not having much free time. The fact a coder has a project to walk someone through does not imply they are a good coder, so why would a company tailor their int…

When I sign up with a company I always get the stipulation that I can use the code for demonstration purposes, that the code will never leave my machine but that I can use it for demonstration purposes. Short of working on some top secret project I would not agree to anything else, not being able to show previous work in this industry is like an artist not being able to show commercial work as their portfolio.

The fact a coder has a project to walk someone through does not imply they are a good coder

No but it is an indication of their work, because it is sitting right there in front of you. Just because they have a project does not mean that it is good, but that is up to the interviewer to decide. If you can look at the code base, then the interviewer should be able to determine if it is well built or not. If they cannot, then I would question whether they should be the one conducting the interview.

so why would a company tailor their interview process to the minority of interview candidates out there who do have a sizable project they can demo

I personally feel that someone looking for a senior developer role should have something that they can demo, they have been in the business for 5 to 10 years, there should be something that they can run on their machine to demonstrate their abilities. Now for a junior developer, I agree they may not have something to demo, but for a junior role I assume a blank slate and look for totally different values. Specifically I look for passion and eagerness to learn, again a test is not going to tell me that.

Post reply on HN