We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else • Hacker News Board

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#181

Post by geebee » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:26 PM UTC

qmalzp wrote: post #145

dominotw wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So its basically extended interview for like 8 weeks where your every move is being watched/judged. When did it become ok to treat people like shit and humiliate them with these ridiculous "interviews". Seems like we keep coming up one worse idea after another. Shame on everyone who thinks its ok to humiliate people with your idiotic algorithm/whiteboard/big O interviews. This is getting so out of hand. Can we bring…

Am I the only person who thinks algorithmic/big O puzzles are kind of fun? Like they're super high stress when you're interviewing, but basically everything is super high stress when you're interviewing.

They are kind of fun. I enjoy the problems in "Cracking the coding interview". In fact, preparing for a google interview (no offer) actually reminded me of why I like programming so much. You need to think deeply and creatively about interesting problems, rather than spending all day trying to figure out how to fix "errno 64: gcc header missing"…

My misgiving about these interviews is that they are really exams, without the examiner/examinee accord that I think slowly evolved over time, in institutions that are exam-heavy, to provide balance and fairness to both sides. Think about exams at a university: most (but not all) of the time, formal exams come with a number of rights for the person taking the test. It must be consistent, it must be graded fairly, it can't be capricious, it must be related to the coursework, if you fail, you have the right to know why you didn't pass, you get feedback, you get a lasting credential, you have a "study path", and you have a grievance process if you feel things were biased, unfair, or inappropriate.

I understand that companies are tight lipped because of liability issues, this means applicants take a high stress five hour exam, but with nearly no feedback. Supposedly there are numerical scores in a database about candidates, but they are not allowed to know what those scores are.

Unfortunately, I do think this amounts to an exam without the rights that evolved over time to make sure the process wasn't excessively abusive to people who sit for exams.

Lastly - I tend to agree that a company is free to set up what hiring process it likes, within limits. If a month long paid audition/consulting gig is how they'd like to do this, and they accept that this means they will lose out on people with stable jobs (often people with children or other dependents), that's fine. But what do you think about companies that do this but then start complaining to congress that there is a terrible shortage of workers? Should we take them seriously?

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#182

Post by sandmansandine » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

potatolicious wrote: post #163

maxaf wrote: post #127

> The most significant shift we’ve made is requiring every final candidate to work with us for three to eight weeks on a contract basis. Are you fucking kidding me? What am I going to tell my current employer while I "audition" for the mere possibility of a next job? Most working adults in the US don't even get three to eight weeks of discretionary vacation that they aren't already using to spend time with family or,…

This strategy seems like it would effectively choose the best candidates out of the pool labeled "desperate people". It mostly categorically excludes anyone who has market desirability and doesn't have to put up with it. I suppose it could work in parts of the country/world where the supply of engineers vastly exceeds the number of jobs, but it likely fails spectacularly in anything resembling a tech hub. This strike…

Yep, I interviewed with a small startup in the ABQ/Denver area and they asked if I could build a project over the week with their platform. "You know, don't spend more than 8 hours or so on it, you can just do it over a weekend and then maybe take some notes on any bad documentation or ideas you have"...

Luckily I had many other interviews to go to, I didn't waste my time on their project. I'm sure a lot of people in Albuquerque would have though.

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#183

Post by cableshaft » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

aduitsis wrote: post #47

neverminder wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't agree more with this. Also Codility tests in which fresh graduates do very well and more senior engineers fail, because most of the academical/theoretical/generic stuff is forgotten since it's rarely needed in the real world.

I've seen people that have solid proven development experience of more than a decade, investing time preparing for coding interviews(!). And, in a perverse way, it makes sense because they know that they are going to be asked to do something their experience has little to do with and most likely forgotten after university.

I've had to do that. Doesn't matter that I've been lead programmer on multiple projects and lead teams in developing apps that (at the time) the interviewer could download, play around with, and see my name in the credits...

Nope, we aren't even going to ask you anything about that, or let you open up your iPad and show us, here's a whiteboard, start writing up a recursive permutation algorithm (only ever had to do this in programming interviews) because we want to prove you know how to do recursive stuff (and then tell us why you should almost never use recursive solutions in our apps), oh, and how about a red-black tree (algorithms class ran out of time to cover, unneeded since), or how about coding this specific sort (heap, merge, whatever) that you'd almost never use in actuality because there are tried and true libraries that are already more efficient than you'd ever be doing it from scratch?

Ugh. Fine, you can do your test, but please don't ignore my prior experience or act like you haven't even given a cursory glance at my resume, or even worse, make a dismissive comment when I talk about it during the interview. It really is insulting. And yet half the interviews I've been in have been like this.

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#184

Post by ktRolster » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

maxaf wrote: post #127

> The most significant shift we’ve made is requiring every final candidate to work with us for three to eight weeks on a contract basis. Are you fucking kidding me? What am I going to tell my current employer while I "audition" for the mere possibility of a next job? Most working adults in the US don't even get three to eight weeks of discretionary vacation that they aren't already using to spend time with family or,…

Maybe the solution would be to pay 25% extra during the audition. In that case, it is something I would be willing to do.

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#185

Post by nbb » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #143

ghaff wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He does go on to say that it's 10-20 hours per week that they can do on nights and weekends for which they are paid. That said, I don't really disagree with your basic point. Under the appropriate circumstances, some limited paid contract work can make sense. For example, for an industry analyst job, we used to ask for writing samples. In retrospect, asking them to write something on a specific topic (and paying for…

So candidates are expected to work evenings and weekends instead of spending that time with their families? The process seems to strongly favor young and single folks. Then again maybe that's fully intended. The tech industry has a huge ageism problem after all.

Well, it's only for a few weeks and only when you are looking to change jobs, and you get paid. I'd wager that many, if not most, people wouldn't mind picking up a little extra income on the side from time to time.

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#186

Post by ktRolster » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

hitekker wrote: post #120

The article is a real gem. One part I particularly like: >This level of strictness always made me uncomfortable. I'm not going to lie, it starts with my own selfishness. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't get hired at big, famous companies with legendarily difficult technical interview processes because, you know, they only hire the best. I don't think I am one of the best. More like cranky, tenacious, and outspoken, to the…

Well that's great, I was condescending him this whole time!

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#187

Post by dang » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

greglindahl wrote: post #142

maxaf wrote: post #127

> The most significant shift we’ve made is requiring every final candidate to work with us for three to eight weeks on a contract basis. Are you fucking kidding me? What am I going to tell my current employer while I "audition" for the mere possibility of a next job? Most working adults in the US don't even get three to eight weeks of discretionary vacation that they aren't already using to spend time with family or,…

Trial employment is a great way to not be able to hire the best. A trial period means uncertainty. Any reasonable candidate will consider that a negative, compared to a competing offer which looks more certain.

What's a better option in your view? Interviews suck and seem hopelessly broken.

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#188

Post by dang » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

MajorLOL wrote: post #156

>Those of us who have families simply can not afford to do this. Then don't take the job? Your life choices (Children, wife, loan payments) aren't the fault or social responsibility of your prospective employer. Why get so uppity about a job you aren't even going to apply for?

> Why get so uppity

Please don't be uncivil.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11224877 and marked it off-topic.

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#189

Post by dsp1234 » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

greglindahl wrote: post #142

maxaf wrote: post #127

> The most significant shift we’ve made is requiring every final candidate to work with us for three to eight weeks on a contract basis. Are you fucking kidding me? What am I going to tell my current employer while I "audition" for the mere possibility of a next job? Most working adults in the US don't even get three to eight weeks of discretionary vacation that they aren't already using to spend time with family or,…

Trial employment is a great way to not be able to hire the best. A trial period means uncertainty. Any reasonable candidate will consider that a negative, compared to a competing offer which looks more certain.

A trial period means uncertainty.

More specifically, this is another way for an employer to move the risk of hiring back onto the employee. It's the employee who is going to need to leave their current position for an 'audition'. This is going to put the employee at a disadvantage during negotiations because the employee will likely not have as strong a position compared to have an existing job to fall back on.

So unless the 'best' are already unemployed, then this helps the employer reduce their risk, and improve their bargaining power during offer negotiations.

As a thought experiment, if you were trying to hire one of the 'best', during negotiations would you prefer if that person was currently employed or currently unemployed? As an employee, I'm glad that generally my BATNA includes staying at my current position (at a minimum).

Re: We Hire the Best, Just Like Everyone Else

#190

Post by emodendroket » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:31 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #130

emodendroket wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would professional musicians be unwilling to audition in a non-anonymous situation? That sounds quite dubious to me.

I had to Google for it and I don't have the story right. Claudia Goldin was one of the authors of this study: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.90.4.715 She was able to attribute 25% of the increase in hiring of women by orchestras was due to the blind auditions. She also found that there was an explosion of auditions when orchestras adopted the blind format. So it had an effect, just not as large a…

OK, perhaps so. But still, the 25% figure shows a large bias against hiring women (which is the conclusion of the study you have linked as well).