I've taken several kinds of psychometric tests, but have never seen one that produces a single result, whose unit is %. What kind of psychometric test could that possibly be?
He got 1%, we can't hire him
51–60 of 594 posts
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Count the number of people in senior mgmt and in all positions who can do fizzbuzz. Greater than 50% in all cases - great. Greater than 50 % for all but less than 20% in senior positions - get out. Anything less - run for the hills. It's not saying its important - everyone in Hollywood says the story is the thing - but only Pixar seems to live by it. See any talk by Ed Catmull
Why do people say "doing fizzbuzz" rather than just programming? Fizzbuzz is just a trick question to see if new programmers know how to use the modulo operator or not.
Fizzbuzz is a test for programming-ability. It's easy to explain, easy to grade, easy to run. If you wanna check if someone can programme, then someone else has already come up with a good test (fizzbuzz) to give them.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#53Improving a company 101: * Get rid of HR people. * Profit.
Only once have I had a job where I was interviewed by a HR person. The whole interview made me feel uneasy, but I took the job anyway. I should have trusted my instincts and rejected the job, on the grounds that they put HR people to interview engineers with silly questions.
The job, and the working environment in particular, was horrible and I didn't stay after my probation period.
On the other hand, I was put on a dead end project and the company, despite being a rather small one, was like a big corporation where you can hide without doing anything and still get paid.
I actually read a few thousand pages of Intel programming manuals and wrote not one but two toy operating system projects and got paid for it!
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently spent a year working for an "elite" Silicon Valley startup company. The VP engineering had read enough Joel Spolsky to get through the door.. but he didn't practice software literacy. I would love to work for a shop, even in an underling capacity, that really gets software dev right. It would be worth delaying my startup dreams just so I can do it right at scale.
Count the number of people in senior mgmt and in all positions who can do fizzbuzz. Greater than 50% in all cases - great. Greater than 50 % for all but less than 20% in senior positions - get out. Anything less - run for the hills. It's not saying its important - everyone in Hollywood says the story is the thing - but only Pixar seems to live by it. See any talk by Ed Catmull
[deleted]
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#55Is "me and X" as the subject of a sentence valid British English grammar? It comes across as really uneducated.
It's not really valid, but it's not uncommon either. It's something that would sound unremarkable in speech but looks quite bad when written down.
I like to read what I write aloud as a sense check before submitting it - nothing stood out immediately. My wife often tells me my (written) English is terrible.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Count the number of people in senior mgmt and in all positions who can do fizzbuzz. Greater than 50% in all cases - great. Greater than 50 % for all but less than 20% in senior positions - get out. Anything less - run for the hills. It's not saying its important - everyone in Hollywood says the story is the thing - but only Pixar seems to live by it. See any talk by Ed Catmull
Why do people say "doing fizzbuzz" rather than just programming? Fizzbuzz is just a trick question to see if new programmers know how to use the modulo operator or not.
fizzbuzz I find is also used as slang for "Groks simple programming". I would say any fizzbuzz equivalent would be fine too.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#57Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#58Is "me and X" as the subject of a sentence valid British English grammar? It comes across as really uneducated.
It's not really valid, but it's not uncommon either. It's something that would sound unremarkable in speech but looks quite bad when written down.
It's perfectly valid. "X and I" is only valid if the sentence makes sense if you only used "I".
This article makes one valid use of "me and X":
> in an effort to score extra points with me and Carl.
If you changed that to "Carl and I" then took out Carl it would be "to score extra points with I", which is disturbing and wrong.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Count the number of people in senior mgmt and in all positions who can do fizzbuzz. Greater than 50% in all cases - great. Greater than 50 % for all but less than 20% in senior positions - get out. Anything less - run for the hills. It's not saying its important - everyone in Hollywood says the story is the thing - but only Pixar seems to live by it. See any talk by Ed Catmull
Why do people say "doing fizzbuzz" rather than just programming? Fizzbuzz is just a trick question to see if new programmers know how to use the modulo operator or not.
Knowing how to fizzbuzz doesn't make you a good programmer.
But not being able to do it is a very strong signal that someone can't program in any professional setting, no matter what they pretend. It's a very simple and effective test to rule out people who think/pretend they can program, but really can't.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#60I've taken several kinds of psychometric tests, but have never seen one that produces a single result, whose unit is %. What kind of psychometric test could that possibly be?
Even when I saw my own results, towards the end of my employment there, there wasn't a single overall metric result.
Maybe she did some kind of averaging, or maybe she was told by management to invent a reason to reject him... since about 96% of the company was of British White origin - I shouldn't speculate though.