On asking job candidates to code • Hacker News Board

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#21

Post by kasey_junk » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:08 PM UTC

maxaf wrote: post #17

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

Would you feel better about providing work samples if you got paid fairly for each one?

This almost always comes up in work sample discussions. There is a fairly obvious reason those of us who advocate for them don't do that. It would rule out a large contingent of the candidate pool who have signed agreements not to work for money without prior approval or notification to their current employers.

It also opens the hiring company to potential liability with regards to IP laws if you are hiring in a similar industry.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#22

Post by MiddleEndian » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:10 PM UTC

CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #11

orng wrote: post #4

I really hate having to solve these kind of programming challenges. I've already sent you my CV, with references from former/current employers and co-workers. Call them up if you are worried that I'm lying on my résumé, don't waste my time by making me work for the chance of maybe getting a job as only payment. Doing multiple interviews already takes up enough of my time, seeing as I'm the one who has to commute to y…

The problem is: Writing good resumes and having a lot of experience with programming is a good heuristic for "experience" and "knows how to play the game" but not meaningfully useful for "excellent at programming". Work-sample tests measure the latter. A worker's experience is a heuristic for programming skill, but a heuristic of a heuristic is like an average of a set of averages: Useless.

Just to play devil's advocate, being excellent at programming is also only a heuristic for working as a professional programmer.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#23

Post by jasode » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:11 PM UTC

kasey_junk wrote: post #19

jasode wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (ie, work sample tests), I do not understand why any tech company does developer hiring in any other way. Because every method of hiring has its own biases and tradeoffs. Requiring work samples biases against programmers who aren't interested in doing a "homework assignment". For example, I don't enjoy whiteboard interviews but I'd rather write some fragments in front of the interviewer and "think out loud" instead…

> For a company like Google Inc who is more selecitve than Harvard University Nitpick, but I'd love to see a citation on that. Google, like every technology company on the planet (modulo a small error value) goes to great lengths to recruit and hires lots and lots of people.

See my previous footnote about them receiving 1 million resumes to fill 1,000 slots. If that's true, it is more selective than any Ivy League university.

Here's another one showing 75,000 resumes received in one week: http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Google-gets-record-75...

When you have the luxury to pick the best, from the best of the best, you don't have to follow the advice given by HN armchair quarterbacks like us.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#24

Post by pc86 » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:11 PM UTC

maxaf wrote: post #17

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

Would you feel better about providing work samples if you got paid fairly for each one?

Not everyone can or wants to take on the onus of basically being a part-time contractor just to switch jobs.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#25

Post by jghn » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:13 PM UTC

kasey_junk wrote: post #15

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

> Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? I'd say 8 hours is too long. I always strive for a 4 hours, but I've seen that 4 hours chop 16 hours off of the candidates time and more than 32 off of the companies. > What's the point of maintaining an online portfolio and a github profile full of code The vast, vast, vast majority of candidates…

We ask candidates to pick a work sample of something they already have, if they have one they can provide. If they don't we give them a relatively painless coding test instead.

It's not perfect, it'd be great if everyone could have a work sample but as you say that's just not the world we live in.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#26

Post by alistairSH » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:14 PM UTC

CaRDiaK wrote: post #14

Not writing code for a potential employer or being asked to in an interview is a warning flag to me personally. I feel better if they do, as they've seen the goods to influence their decision on the hire. It's more about "How does this person think, how do they approach the problem". How can you measure that unless you're there? I see a lot of "I shouldn't have to do that". Well yeah, ok. But if you're any good, you…

Well yeah, ok. But if you're any good, you shouldn't have a problem with that either.

Whiteboarding, sure. Homework assignment that takes 8 hours, as the author experienced? No way. I'm good, my hourly rate reflects that, and I don't work for free.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#27

Post by macNchz » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:14 PM UTC

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

The time involved in these things really can add up... I was recently asked to do a take home challenge that took a couple of hours to hack together, followed by several hours of nailing down edge cases due to the nature of the task. Then the company scheduled a phone call during which I thought we'd discuss the design decisions I'd made while working on the task. Instead, the interviewer had never seen the code I sent in, didn't even know which challenge I'd done and had me screenshare-coding brainteaser puzzles for over an hour on the phone. Talk about wasting my time.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#28

Post by pc86 » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:19 PM UTC

CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #11

orng wrote: post #4

I really hate having to solve these kind of programming challenges. I've already sent you my CV, with references from former/current employers and co-workers. Call them up if you are worried that I'm lying on my résumé, don't waste my time by making me work for the chance of maybe getting a job as only payment. Doing multiple interviews already takes up enough of my time, seeing as I'm the one who has to commute to y…

The problem is: Writing good resumes and having a lot of experience with programming is a good heuristic for "experience" and "knows how to play the game" but not meaningfully useful for "excellent at programming". Work-sample tests measure the latter. A worker's experience is a heuristic for programming skill, but a heuristic of a heuristic is like an average of a set of averages: Useless.

You don't want to hire people who are incapable of functioning in a professional setting or interacting with coworkers, so I'm not sure expecting experience and a well-crafted resume (regardless of the content) is a problem.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#29

Post by vinw » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:20 PM UTC

Hermel wrote: post #18

In my experience, asking candidates to read and explain someone else's code is a much better indicator than letting them do some whiteboard programming.

Similarly I've found that talking through some deliberately broken code, and what improvements could be made to it, gives a good idea of what a candidate would be like to work with on real problems. It's more about the discussion than the code changes they come up with!

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#30

Post by CiPHPerCoder » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 1:22 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #28

CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is: Writing good resumes and having a lot of experience with programming is a good heuristic for "experience" and "knows how to play the game" but not meaningfully useful for "excellent at programming". Work-sample tests measure the latter. A worker's experience is a heuristic for programming skill, but a heuristic of a heuristic is like an average of a set of averages: Useless.

You don't want to hire people who are incapable of functioning in a professional setting or interacting with coworkers, so I'm not sure expecting experience and a well-crafted resume (regardless of the content) is a problem.

Just as grep and cat solve different problems, work-sample tests and traditional resume-based hiring practices select for different candidates.

I wasn't arguing in favor of work-sample tests for every company and every candidate, just saying their scope is different (although work-sample tests are more likely to find the untapped potential in the marketplace).