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

How to hire low experience, high potential people

worktopia.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 433 posts

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#301

Post by ska »

agumonkey wrote: post #104
CharlieDigital wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a 4-quardrant way of thinking about this that's similar. - Y-axis is "drive" - X-axis is "aptitude" - low drive + low aptitude: never hire - low drive + high aptitude: hire for targeted use cases where you need expertise - high drive + low aptitude: hire, train, and foster aptitude growth - high drive + high aptitude: hire on the spot There's an indirect way of testing for this which is to test for curiosity a…

out of curiosity, do you often run into low aptitude + low drive but highly politically skilled ? do they get caught early ?

> low drive but highly politically skilled

These two don't really match up, they are just driven for different things I suspect.

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#302

Post by potamic »

tptacek wrote: post #223
swozey wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you communicated via email and the only consideration was the quality of their sample? Nobody at any point literally spoke to this person? We've had a ton of issues at my corp of people having other people handle their interview questions, code, or having AI listen to the conversation and answer questions by text as if we prompted it. Then they show up online after being hired and they have webcam problems or neve…

Our process runs mostly through email until the last challenge, which is interactive (for every role in the company we simulate some kind of design or problem solving exercise on Slack with an random member of our team, which is then rated based on a rubric by a panel that reviews the transcript; it differs from an interview in a variety of ways, most notably that the team member delivering the exercise doesn't ever…

That's an interesting approach. In an interview, you generally drive the discussion a certain way to gather data points for your rubric. Wouldn't this happen in your case? If yes, how is it different from an interview? Otherwise, how do you evaluate candidates who solve the problem but don't seem to communicate much about it.

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#303

Post by zebraflask »

bheadmaster wrote: post #7

> “Tell me about you. If your life was a book, give me the chapter titles from your birth till now.” Once you’ve gotten the overview, dive into each “chapter” and plumb the depths for their real stories. Go back to their childhood! I learn a lot about their grit and commitment to excellence from their basketball obsession or maybe their experience caring for a dying parent. I don't think I'd be comfortable sharing th…

+1 to the comments pointing out that these types of questions can easily veer into highly intrusive, if not overtly discriminatory, territory.

This reminds me of LinkedIn pablum more than anything else.

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#304

Post by tptacek »

potamic wrote: post #302
tptacek wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our process runs mostly through email until the last challenge, which is interactive (for every role in the company we simulate some kind of design or problem solving exercise on Slack with an random member of our team, which is then rated based on a rubric by a panel that reviews the transcript; it differs from an interview in a variety of ways, most notably that the team member delivering the exercise doesn't ever…

That's an interesting approach. In an interview, you generally drive the discussion a certain way to gather data points for your rubric. Wouldn't this happen in your case? If yes, how is it different from an interview? Otherwise, how do you evaluate candidates who solve the problem but don't seem to communicate much about it.

Nope! It's complicated. We put a lot of effort into deprogramming candidates before the simulation (we call it a "workday"). If you join the Slack channel for a workday and wait for us to ask you questions, almost nothing will happen. The candidate drives, apart from the brief we provide at the beginning of the session.

The rubric heavily draws from what questions the candidate asks, and which topics they choose to zoom in and spend time on. It's interesting; I warn candidates that studying for it ahead of time (for instance: for a long time our workdays were all based on a block storage problem) puts you at a disadvantage, by robbing you of good questions to ask. It's not a big disadvantage, but interview-style preparation isn't doing much to help you either.

I'm always reluctant to talk too much about the workday process, in particular because the more I describe it the less chill it sounds. In reality, it's you joining a Slack channel with an engineer from our team and just shooting the shit about something we're (in the simulation) planning to build.

A lot of what that challenge is evaluating is communication. We're an all-remote company with team members in virtually ever time zone; being able to work out in the open in the environment we've created is important.

I think our workdays are a pretty quirky feature of our process. You could instead do a scripted interview, where everybody gets precisely the same questions or prompts. The big thing we do with the workday that I think everyone should clone is: deliver the interview over Slack, and don't allow the person delivering the interview to grade it; instead, have someone else grade from the transcript. It was like a light went off (on?) for us when we figured out to stop having workday participants offer performance feedback about candidates.

(One thing you immediately get from it is a process to iterate on the quality of your staff delivering the workday/interview; you can immediately see which team members click with candidates and which don't, and then nudge people in the right direction. It is wild to me that people do free-form interviews without this kind of iteration system in place.)

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#305

Post by em-bee »

testfoobar wrote: post #235
the_mar wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok so how should someone with a traumatic childhood answer questions about their childhood? You can change the subject or answer very surface-level and be labeled "unengaged" or "socially inept" You can answer truthfully and be judged for traumadumping You can make up a fake origin story that fits the interviewer's criteria and be disingenuous

I don't know about you or your story. I hope you're doing well. I've learned that the majority of people just don't want to hear anything negative or anything that makes them feel sad. If I want to have social, casual friends, I have to wall off parts of my life story. Thankfully, I have a couple of close friends and family who know the reality and that is enough for me.

that's why i don't care about casual friends. i mean i do have some, but that's because we have some hobby that we share. the people in that group however are all replaceable.

what's not replaceable is deep friendships with people that do care and are open to listen.

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#306

Post by em-bee »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #260
testfoobar wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you or your story. I hope you're doing well. I've learned that the majority of people just don't want to hear anything negative or anything that makes them feel sad. If I want to have social, casual friends, I have to wall off parts of my life story. Thankfully, I have a couple of close friends and family who know the reality and that is enough for me.

I'm really glad I don't live in a country like this.

that's no country. you find these kind of people everywhere. my theory is that the people who don't want to hear those things have not yet dealt with their own traumas (which can take decades).

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#307

Post by MichaelZuo »

CharlieDigital wrote: post #292
conro1108 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a similar shape but with quite different conclusions - low drive + low aptitude: never hire Hammerstein thinks some use can be made of these folks - low drive + high aptitude: hire for targeted use cases where you need expertise Hammerstein has this group as high leadership positions - high drive + low aptitude: hire, train, and foster aptitude growth These are the ones who Hammerstein avoids - high drive + high…

> These are the ones who Hammerstein avoids My experience has been that aptitude can be developed. In the context of "low experience" (generally junior engineers), the ones that succeed are the ones that put the work in to learn and get better. But I can appreciate Hammerstein's perspective, especially if there isn't an added nuance of Carol Dweck's "fixed" vs "growth" mindset. A high drive, low aptitude individual -…

"A high drive, low aptitude individual", even if they have the best mindset in the world, shouldn't be placed in a sensitive position. As even a small chance of messing up with 'high drive' will really cause a lot of issues.

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#308

Post by wolverine876 »

theonething wrote: post #243
testfoobar wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author appears young. I would give them the benefit of the doubt. It has been my experience that people who have lived a fortunate, trauma free life cannot really understand the trauma experienced by others. They might appear to understand, say all the right words, and so on. Then a few days later or weeks later be confused or upset because of how you react to something. A good friend once said to me, "Wow, that…

> "Wow, that is still upsetting you?" If not a jerk, then grossly lacking in sensitivity, empathy and tact.

At first I agreed with you, but then I remembered: Where is our sensitivity, empathy and tact for the person who said that, who may have their own trauma and own issues?

The reality, the beauty of human relationships is that they are between people with all these issues and dimensions, all the nuance and detail that make up human beings. In the wild, there's no laboratory people - no clean, perfect specimens in simple environments.

My rule is, I don't know what someone else has been through and is going through. Never, ever judge. If absolutely necessary (e.g., I need to decide to partner with them or not), make my best guess but don't judge.

Re: How to hire low experience, high potential people

#309

Post by Xelynega »

throwup238 wrote: post #102
calvinmorrison wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care about the details the questions are meant to generate discussions. We can have you do stupid personality quiz instead. There are no bad answers to Myers Briggs. The test is stupid but also just a jumping point to dig into someone's personality

> We can have you do stupid personality quiz instead. There are no bad answers to Myers Briggs. Why is that the alternative? All of the above sounds awful to me. Are you looking for an employer or signing up for a cult?

They're looking for legal reasons to choose candidates they've decided beforehand.
Post reply on HN