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

Hiring Is Broken?

software.rajivprab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 201 posts

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#171

Post by monksy »

closeparen wrote: post #158
lubesGordi wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's pretty easy to tell where a senior engineer is at if you're in the same domain as them. Just discussing projects really provides much more insight than leetcoding them to death. It's shocking to me how many places are leetcoding senior engineers before talking to them about their past work or discussing design. Is it because we want to have hiring automated? Is it because of discrimination? Why is the leetc…

Behavioral, system design, coding, and problem solving interviews are AND gated. It's not a question of one being more important, but which ordering optimizes the funnel and employee time. There are many more calendar slots belonging to tech ICs than to hiring managers; you can run a higher velocity pipeline if you start with a technical phone screen. The coding interview itself is an immune system against the surpri…

> but not actually perform

You're trying to measure how they'll perform on your work before you hire them? That sounds like you're trying to get free work from them. (Just a note.. this is on the words you used)

> recognize smart people who will do well with whatever they're given,

How does a take home coding test that is limited on time, and their own time + stress indicate that they are in that category?

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#172

Post by dahart »

0x445442 wrote: post #136
neilv wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I asked a recruiter there whether someone like that (like the creator of a popular programming language) would have to go through the normal new-grad-style whiteboard coding hazing gauntlet (phrased diplomatically) interview process that they were expecting me to. The recruiter said no. I decided not to interview, because it turns out the hazing wasn't something "everyone" had to do, and I just didn't rate decent tre…

At this point in my career I won’t do coding tests or problems at home or over the phone. I’ve done my fair share of hiring and I’ve never needed to resort to such things. Being asked to perform these tasks is actually a pretty good litmus test to filter out companies. Also, I expect a certain degree of deference given my resume shows a 25 year history of implementing and delivering systems.

I have about the same amount of professional experience, and have done lots of hiring and leading of teams. A few years ago I took a job that interviewed me with a coding test. (Which was only one of many phases of the interview). The coding test was quite fun, the company allowed the test in the language of my choice, and it was mostly about implementing rules for a game, and for bonus points, some A.I. to play the game. Not very long after taking the job, I was doing the interviewing and administering the coding tests to interviewees.

There were applicants with a decade or more of experience who, like you, expected some deference and were annoyed or offended, and complained about having to take a coding test. But they were applying for programming roles, not management. Those people didn’t get hired; negative attitudes are a red flag. In effect, this particular company likewise used them as a litmus test to filter out applicants unwilling (or unable) to demonstrate their advertised abilities.

Note especially how the coding test is actually being used to evaluate attitude and things other than coding skill. It’s not valid to assume that being asked to do a coding test implies that someone doesn’t believe you about your experience.

That said, resumes are very easy to fluff up with big sounding projects, so talking through past project details and demonstrating your abilities with a coding test should be par for the course if you want to change companies.

I actually agree and I don’t think coding projects are necessary for hiring, but I do think they’re useful, not bad, and I don’t give deference to anyone when I’m interviewing, no matter how accomplished. I look for people who are smart, willing to learn, excited to do the job, excited to interview for my company, and willing to try.

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#173

Post by golemiprague »

dahart wrote: post #87

> Anyone can glamorize and exaggerate the work they have done, and make it sound a lot more impressive than it actually was My personal experience interviewing is that people cannot easily glamorize their past projects when pressed for details. It might be easy to make it look good on a resume, but hard in person during a discussion with follow up questions. I think asking about past projects is a fantastic interview…

I agree, I don't even bother doing code testing, it is much better to talk to someone about past projects and get a gut feeling if they are good or not. It is the common thing to do in most other professions, people don't sit for tests, sometimes you can ask a bit more difficult questions like how would you do this or that or whatever but nobody expect people to sit and fill up pages in most professions and rightfully so. There is no advantage predicting the future from those tests over a simple gut feeling.

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#174

Post by mjfisher »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #168
n_ary wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take home has two sides to it. Group A: People who excel at face to face interviews(extroverted) will complain that it is waste of time and disrespectful, because it demands significant time commitment compared to a 1 hour in-person interview. Group B: People with interview anxiety(introverted) will excel at this type of test because they have the freedom to set aside their own time, do things at their own pace and e…

I don't know that I'm extroverted. I'm still in group A, though, because I don't have interview anxiety. My problem with take home stuff is that it's asymmetrical. That is, if we're doing a phone interview, it takes my time, and it takes your time. Ditto an in-person interview. You're serious enough to commit some of your time to it, so I'm willing to also do so. I know you're looking at other candidates, but if you…

I think the scenario you describe sucks for all kinds of reasons, but it doesn't have to be like that. If the coding challenge is for an early stage screen, you should be looking at about 30mins worth of work. If it's more in-depth than that, it's not like the hiring company will have time to properly review them all at a screening stage anyway.

I'd support more complicated take home skill assessment tests later on in the recruitment pipeline, as long as they add real value for both the candidate and the company, and they're only given to well qualified and screened candidates. I'd also be concerned at a twelve hour test - that sounds like something very poorly scoped.

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#175

Post by dahart »

monksy wrote: post #171
closeparen wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Behavioral, system design, coding, and problem solving interviews are AND gated. It's not a question of one being more important, but which ordering optimizes the funnel and employee time. There are many more calendar slots belonging to tech ICs than to hiring managers; you can run a higher velocity pipeline if you start with a technical phone screen. The coding interview itself is an immune system against the surpri…

> but not actually perform You're trying to measure how they'll perform on your work before you hire them? That sounds like you're trying to get free work from them. (Just a note.. this is on the words you used) > recognize smart people who will do well with whatever they're given, How does a take home coding test that is limited on time, and their own time + stress indicate that they are in that category?

> You’re trying to measure how they’ll perform on your work before you hire them? That sounds like you’re trying to get free work from them.

I wish the hyperbole about trying to get free work during an interview would just die already. Nobody is getting free work by interviewing applicants, interviews are costly to most companies, but necessary to grow the team.

Just because interviews take time and are difficult and scary doesn’t mean someone is taking advantage of you. Try to put yourself in the company’s shoes — they have to evaluate you one way or the other. How would you do it?

A time limited stress test is extremely effective at identifying certain kinds of performers. Obviously being able to solve problems fast is an indicator of a certain kind of smart. This doesn’t identify all smart people, and nobody claimed it did, that’s why a coding test is almost always one part of many in the interview process, and people routinely get hired when passing some parts without passing all the parts.

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#176

Post by eropple »

coding123 wrote: post #110

At one (large) company I worked at we hired the guy that basically invented one of the technologies at Sun behind one of the larger JSRs - like an entire standard API for one of the Java EE products (not going to say which) for an architect role. I have no idea why we hired him. He basically sat idle all the time asking what he was supposed to do. He randomly would make charts and show people. He was older, out of to…

> as long as you work at a company that isn't afraid of firing/laying off, hiring isn't fully broken.

Yes, it is--it is just broken in a way that privileges the company over its employees. Firing somebody (absent flagrant abuse and the like) is a failure of management and leadership.

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#177

Post by Aeolun »

dahart wrote: post #175
monksy wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but not actually perform You're trying to measure how they'll perform on your work before you hire them? That sounds like you're trying to get free work from them. (Just a note.. this is on the words you used) > recognize smart people who will do well with whatever they're given, How does a take home coding test that is limited on time, and their own time + stress indicate that they are in that category?

> You’re trying to measure how they’ll perform on your work before you hire them? That sounds like you’re trying to get free work from them. I wish the hyperbole about trying to get free work during an interview would just die already. Nobody is getting free work by interviewing applicants, interviews are costly to most companies, but necessary to grow the team. Just because interviews take time and are difficult and…

I consider it a failure of the company and interviewers if they need more than a few 1hr sessions to determine candidate suitability.

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#178

Post by [deleted] »

dahart wrote: post #175
monksy wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but not actually perform You're trying to measure how they'll perform on your work before you hire them? That sounds like you're trying to get free work from them. (Just a note.. this is on the words you used) > recognize smart people who will do well with whatever they're given, How does a take home coding test that is limited on time, and their own time + stress indicate that they are in that category?

> You’re trying to measure how they’ll perform on your work before you hire them? That sounds like you’re trying to get free work from them. I wish the hyperbole about trying to get free work during an interview would just die already. Nobody is getting free work by interviewing applicants, interviews are costly to most companies, but necessary to grow the team. Just because interviews take time and are difficult and…

[deleted]

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#179

Post by thoman23 »

0x445442 wrote: post #136
neilv wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I asked a recruiter there whether someone like that (like the creator of a popular programming language) would have to go through the normal new-grad-style whiteboard coding hazing gauntlet (phrased diplomatically) interview process that they were expecting me to. The recruiter said no. I decided not to interview, because it turns out the hazing wasn't something "everyone" had to do, and I just didn't rate decent tre…

At this point in my career I won’t do coding tests or problems at home or over the phone. I’ve done my fair share of hiring and I’ve never needed to resort to such things. Being asked to perform these tasks is actually a pretty good litmus test to filter out companies. Also, I expect a certain degree of deference given my resume shows a 25 year history of implementing and delivering systems.

How much hiring and interviewing have you done? I've seen countless resumes with 25 years of stated glorious achievements, and they couldn't write a for loop.

Re: Hiring Is Broken?

#180

Post by tidepod12 »

codingdave wrote: post #27
ddebernardy wrote: post #21

The biggest issue isn't one mentioned in the article. No amount of hiring tricks and hacks will work around the fact that hardly anyone (including most managers and HR pros) gets trained on how to review a resume, conduct an interview, and evaluate a candidate.

This does not ring true based on my experience. Where have you worked where you found this to be the case?

I worked at one of the largest global consulting companies (and I have enough friends in the other major consulting companies to know it's the same in most of them).

I was a relatively junior person working there in my early-to-mid 20s. It was common practice for me and my peers to be asked to review resumes and filter them, as well as be an interviewer every few months. I never once received any kind of training on interviewing or resume review. Not even the 10-minute-cheesy-corporate-video kind of training. Hell, not even a quick 1-pager or chat on tips or things to look for. It was literally just "hey here's a stack of resumes, please filter them".

Post reply on HN