Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview • Hacker News Board

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#111

Post by edoceo » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 8:37 PM UTC

fredophile wrote: post #98

nogabebop23 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what if they "give" you a gift card after you submit? I've had that before, where the gitft card was essentially paypal credit. Not wanting to do an extra project is the second part of this problem - the best people already have jobs and aren't looking, so they're not going to spend all their free time working on high-effort job applications.

I can't speak for my employer but the IRS certainly views gift cards and similar cash equivalent payments to be taxable income.

Correct. And if the IRS calls it income then, odds are, your current employer would consider it the same

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#112

Post by edoceo » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 8:43 PM UTC

monksy wrote: post #75

edoceo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use a gig to hire process for this. It works very well. I've been meaning to write more about it but I also get income for helping with hiring around this model so im a bit conflicted. The whole answer is long and complex. Basically: give candidate a proper task on your project and evaluate them based on that work - the "interview" is less than an hour, the "work" is longer (many hours (and you pay for it)) - provi…

> and you pay for it But just think about all of those business people that want free work and to hire people that are willing to throw themselves in to the project for no extra comp. /s I agree.. also that sets boundaries.

I filter those jerks out before even letting them see my candidates. Step #1 is for me to work with the company to find the project slice - which they also have to comp my time.

So they spend more time and cash on the traditional method...then complain about a lack of talent. Resume keyword filters and non-technical recruiters are a (not) surprising waste.

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#113

Post by RangerScience » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

chucky_z wrote: post #72

RangerScience wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The next best interview would be a portfolio. I tried using my (limited) open source hobby project portfolio as a substitute for coding interviews. Companies either didn't take me up on it, or still also required me to do their regular take-home. Twice now, I have had two companies ask for the same take-home, although in the first case they asked me to re-do the work in their preferred language.

FWIW, as a hiring manager, if someone has a portfolio I definitely judge them on it, and if it's good it allows me to bypass huge swaths of technical/coding interview stuff and dig much deeper into where/what I want. I always take it as a positive, even if it's old stuff.

What do you find makes a portfolio better or worse for these purposes?

Not so much "more likely to get them the job", more... I felt like my projects weren't actually suitable to take the place of coding interviews, largely because I couldn't actually drop in and work on them in the way that coding interviews show me actually doing work.

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#114

Post by vonmoltke » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:21 PM UTC

kabdib wrote: post #12

kanox wrote: post #3

> What’s the best way to test if someone can do a particular job well? Get them to carry out tasks that are part of the job. See if they can do what they say they can do. It’s much harder for someone to lie and mislead an interviewer during actual work than during an interview. Using competency tests for a blinded interview process is also possible—interviewers could look at depersonalized test results to make unbias…

> Is this a serious problem? You would be astonished, absolutely flabbergasted, at the number of "senior engineers" who interview well, talk great about projects, but cannot demonstrate basic programming skills (e.g., convert an integer to a string representation, or write fizzbuzz).

I must be one hell of an outlier, then, because of the dozens of people I have interviewed over the years, exactly one could not demonstrate basic programming skills. Most of them couldn't get much further, but that is a different matter.

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#115

Post by bluGill » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:22 PM UTC

tj0 wrote: post #108

claudiawerner wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm incredibly nervous about job interviews. I'll start sweating in the first two or three minutes even over Zoom. I recently "fell into" a job because my university supervisor recommended me to a friend of his at a small business in which my only test was a code review I could do the day before. But I worry that for any future job because I'm terrible at algorithm questions, and I suspect (and I doubt this is just i…

I'm five years into my career, and still experience this same kind of anxiety. Only recently did I revisit algorithms as I'm getting serious about my job search now, and am still super nervous. Not to mention, having a family, I don't have a ton of time to study for the gauntlet decent tech companies put in place to vet candidates. As for personal projects? See lack of time above. I'm lucky to get an hour a week to w…

Most jobs are who you know. So cultivate the kind of person who interviews well and will quickly be trusted to say hire you.

My first job all open positions went to Jon (last name hid), if he handed a name that person was called in, the interview was reverse, unless you really did something stupid you had the job, the purpose of the interview was to convince you to take it. If Jon didn't know anyone a head hunter was called for a 6 month contract, with option to hire if we liked you. So moral of this story is know Jon.

Where I work now we train people on how to put you at ease. It works okay, I think.

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#116

Post by dahart » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

stove wrote: post #105

dahart wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a rapidly growing population of devs who feel like they're locked out due to the technical interview process. I’m not convinced all these articles about “hiring is broken” and “interviews are broken” actually help with this problem. They are pining for something that may not exist (and may not be possible), and failing to help candidates understand and excel within the current system’s imperfections. I get the impr…

I would argue that _none_ of the articles about “hiring is broken” and “interviews are broken” actually help with this problem. There is near-universal consensus that technical hiring is atrocious and yet very few people putting forth possible solutions and/or companies willing to experiment with the status quo. My ideas are: * Real-world interview questions * Standardized testing for "soft" skills. It can be done. *…

> There is near-universal consensus that technical hiring is atrocious

I hear this a lot on Hacker News, but not inside any companies. And when asked why people think it's atrocious, I rarely get a set of answers that agree on the specifics. I'd love to hear more about what metrics show evidence that hiring is atrocious, as well as what is making it atrocious for you. What does that mean in the pre-coronavirus context? Are companies not finding people, and are people not getting jobs? I'm asking honestly and seriously, so I can improve my own hiring practices. I don't doubt there's a problem, I just don't have a handle on exactly what it is, and the reports here on HN aren't matching my own experience. I admit I don't match the profile of the average web developer, so I may be ignorant of what's happening in the broader tech world today, especially regarding recent hires from school.

In my own experience interviewing at and hiring for multiple companies over the last 20 years, what I've seen and done matches some of your ideas. We are getting and giving real world interview questions. The interviews are at least somewhat standardized. There are dedicated onboarding resources.

I haven't seen names redacted anywhere, and that's a good idea to normalize cultural or gender biases, but problematic if you want people to review your online portfolio, or if you know someone in the company who can vouch for you, both of which many candidates do want.

It is my experience that internal referrals have significantly higher chance of success, pay for the candidate is likely to be higher than for external candidates, and referrers are typically rewarded financially for the referral. Many people complain that the referral system is part of the problem under the logic that it can encourage nepotism and echo chamber behavior. I don't fully agree, but I don't think this is as obvious of a win as you suggest either, or that the majority of people would agree with it.

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#117

Post by bluGill » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:26 PM UTC

stormbrew wrote: post #27

stove wrote: post #11

There's a growing rift in software between employers saying "there's a talent shortage" and a rapidly growing population of devs who feel like they're locked out due to the technical interview process. Many of the engineers not being hired are recent bootcamp grads but there are also tons of CS majors that can't seem to "crack" the interview process. Part of my job is helping companies "fix" their hiring and one of t…

My experience, as someone who has advocated for hiring people along the same lines, is that this is a pitch that everyone will agree is a good idea. But then when it comes time to actually hire someone under it, people will hem and haw about whether or not they have the capacity to mentor people like this. Usually it then won't happen unless they fit a very specific "comfortable" mold of person that they believe can…

Where I work mentoring a junior person is almost mandatory once you reach a certain level. I've been told flat out one reason I was passed for a promotion was I wasn't mentoring people, event though my department didn't have any juniors in at the time, it still held me back (and my boss also started looking for opportunities to mentor outside the department, but I left before that got anywhere for other reasons)

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#118

Post by bluGill » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:29 PM UTC

dahart wrote: post #116

stove wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that _none_ of the articles about “hiring is broken” and “interviews are broken” actually help with this problem. There is near-universal consensus that technical hiring is atrocious and yet very few people putting forth possible solutions and/or companies willing to experiment with the status quo. My ideas are: * Real-world interview questions * Standardized testing for "soft" skills. It can be done. *…

> There is near-universal consensus that technical hiring is atrocious I hear this a lot on Hacker News, but not inside any companies. And when asked why people think it's atrocious, I rarely get a set of answers that agree on the specifics. I'd love to hear more about what metrics show evidence that hiring is atrocious, as well as what is making it atrocious for you. What does that mean in the pre-coronavirus contex…

Where I work hr won't let us ask any question that isn't scientificly proven to make a difference. It makes it hard to ask technical questions.

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#119

Post by booboolayla » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:31 PM UTC

Give existing employees coding interview questions of their colleagues once every three months. It will be very easy to pinpoint the bad players.

Re: Limitations and pitfalls of the job interview

#120

Post by bryanrasmussen » Mon, Jul 06, 2020, 9:32 PM UTC

simonw wrote: post #48

If you want a really big competitive advantage, figure out how to hire great people who don't interview well.

that would really only be a big competitive advantage if great people who don't interview well were more numerous than those who interview at least adequately, or if those great people were greater than the great people who do interview adequately.

I guess it would still be something of a competitive advantage though if you were a great person who got hired despite interviewing poorly you might be more grateful than those who interview well.

But anyway I don't know that anyone has the stats on how many great people interview poorly - I would of course only put myself as average, albeit lucky, and I interview poorly half the time but some times I interview really well, for some reason, and when it clicks like that I get the job. So I assume if there is hope for as bad an interviewee as myself there must be hope for all the other poor interviews out there.