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

Hire people who aren’t proven

leonardofed.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 460 posts

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#241

Post by ryandrake »

emilfihlman wrote: post #216
ConcernedCoder wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say what you will, but who would you rather have take out your appendix? The doctor who worked nights and weekends to put him/herself through medical school because it was the love of their life and their dream to help people?... or the guy/gal who only chose the same career path for the money?

Both are probably just as qualified because of standards. Also, those in it for the money have to do extremely well to earn that money. They can't just hand waive stuff regarding surgery.

Exactly. For someone to call themself a doctor, they had to at least go to medical school and pass the board exam. Even the worst lawyer passed the bar. Anyone who is a pilot has passed their FAA examination and check ride. Yet, anyone can call themself a “Software Engineer” with zero formal qualification and zero evidence of passing even a basic competence hurdle.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#242

Post by ConcernedCoder »

emilfihlman wrote: post #216
ConcernedCoder wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say what you will, but who would you rather have take out your appendix? The doctor who worked nights and weekends to put him/herself through medical school because it was the love of their life and their dream to help people?... or the guy/gal who only chose the same career path for the money?

Both are probably just as qualified because of standards. Also, those in it for the money have to do extremely well to earn that money. They can't just hand waive stuff regarding surgery.

It seems pretty weird to have to argue the point that just like anything else in this life, doctors, lawyers, mechanics, cheese, wine, and toilet paper, there are good quality and bad quality... you get what you pay for, etc... why would this be any different?

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#243

Post by vkou »

namanyayg wrote: post #94
snowwrestler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

Doing software development in high school requires a computer (even a ~$400 that is shared with the family is sufficient), interest, and time (so one can spend hours required reading tutorials/watching videos). Basically, nothing too much out of the reach of your average teenager -- with the exception of interest/dedication to the art. Doctors, and most other professions, cannot be practiced without a lot more invest…

> Basically, nothing too much out of the reach of your average teenager -- with the exception of interest/dedication to the art.

My father grew up, went to school, and finished university in the 70s and 80s, in the Soviet Union, where none of those things were within the reach of an average person. He's only started programming towards the end of his physics PHD. Since moving to Canada, he's done ~20 years of programming.

Biasing hiring towards people who programmed in high school is incredibly ageist.

Sure, a computer is within the reach of most teenagers now. No, a computer was not within the reach of most teenagers 30 years ago - or even 20 years ago.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#244

Post by Joeri »

snowwrestler wrote: post #29
maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

By all means, you should use whatever criteria you would like to hire your own staff. But in general, I would encourage folks in computer tech industries to be hesitant to assume such a binary approach to evaluating prospects. "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. But in…

Asking if they programmed in high school doesn’t necessarily gage their current passion anyway, just their one time passion. Perhaps it’s better to just ask directly: “can you give examples of how you’re passionate about programming?”

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#245

Post by tayo42 »

ivanche wrote: post #204
tayo42 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Did you code for fun in high school?" might be a useful question now, because software development as a field is so young that high school students can try out significant work easily. In a way it might be a way to weed out people who are reluctant to try something new. someone who only coded in highschool, a somewhat antisocial hobby, went through college and still only wants to code maybe didn't try anything new…

Have I understood correctly? Somebody who found his passion early in life and wants to pursue it further should be penalized for that?

I had a feeling this would be misinterpreted. I wasn't sure how to word it but no. It's possible to find your passion at a young age. I'm skeptical though. I think it would be a question to branch off of if your discussing it with someone. At 13 how much do you really know, or even really experienced.

Lately I have been thinking that passion is something learned.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#246

Post by maxxxxx »

iamdave wrote: post #97
maxxxxx wrote: post #6

I think hiring has become more difficult now that programming has been discovered as a well paying mainstream career. When I started in the 90s most people I worked with had a passion for the craft but now I find we interview a lot of people who have a CS degree just for the career prospects but not out of interest for the craft. I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs s…

I find it much easier to deal with someone who has no relevant experience but cares vs someone who had 10 years experience but doesn't care Why? This is a legitimate, but deeply opinionated "why". You employing me and me working for you is a business transaction. Why should I care about your mission beyond giving enough 'care' to produce great work that helps you run your business, run it well, so much that you'll wa…

"Why should I care about your mission "

I don't care if you care about the mission of the company. It probably helps but I don't care that much either as long as the company doesn't do anything illegal or something I find ethically objectionable. I care whether you care about your craft and want to improve. I care if we can have interesting discussions about work and tech or if you just want to be told what to do next and never contribute anything interesting.

I spend around 40 hours a week at work so I want to make this as enjoyable as possible. To me that means mental stimulation and enjoying working with my team. From my experience people who respect each other and enjoy each other are vastly more productive than people who don't.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#247

Post by ergothus »

scarface74 wrote: post #200
ergothus wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Passionate" in programming is shorthand for "cares for quality" AND "will improve on their own". Companies are unwilling or unable to train on the job (because it requires tech mentor resources they dont have /wont spare) so they are looking for people they can drop in and see payout for without further investment (particularly in time). I think it is a shortsighted strategy, but not one without basis. The supply pr…

When hiring managers talk about “passion” what they usually mean is that they want to hire a geek who is willing to work crazy hours because of a love of programming and won’t dare negotiate for higher pay or leave for a job that will pay them more.

I've heard this distinction before, and I think it's a difference in the base quality of the place. My last three jobs all put "passion" as a major hiring criteria, but all maintained a strong work/life balance (average work week was 40 hours give or take a few, and though crunch times happened more than a few weeks a year was considered a bad thing. I conducted plenty of interviews myself and helped write interview questions so I'm pretty confident in what _we_ meant at least, even if I wasn't a hiring manager.

One of those places, however, did slide after a few years into the nastiness described (I left when the slide started, and it reportedly continued). Another

So while "Passion" CAN mean "we want huge levels of uncompensated work without complaint", that has not been the norm for mean and I think it's a mistake to assume that is what is always meant. Certainly I've been at some great places to work that I'd have avoided if I thought asking for passion was a negative.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#248

Post by onemoresoop »

slfnflctd wrote: post #44

My initial interest in programming started before 1990. Due to an insane number and variety of mostly personal factors, the farthest I ever got was a couple ancient javascript/HTML experiments, a few small-to-medium side projects in MS Access and some intermediate router configuration. I've primarily just done tech support. I've performed well in the jobs I've chosen, though, because I get along well with others and…

The best place to learn is when you're hired as a software developer at a company. It doesn't matter if the company is good or not, you'll be forced to learn to make the product work. Change a few jobs and some years of tinkering and you'll likely get the fads, buzz, experience, etc.. Best place to start is as junior dev and quickly move up. Learning at home will never give you work experience since the 'real world' environment is not replicable at home.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#249

Post by bvm »

ravenstine wrote: post #188
bvm wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel your pain. Trying to hire perm in London at the moment is a real challenge, even with a recruiter. Contractor rates are obscene (5-8x perm). Recruiting and retaining is what keeps me awake at night over and above any tech issues that I'm working on.

What tends to be lacking in potential candidates? Dunno if you can know this if you're using a recruiter, but I'd be curious.

YMMV but numbers of them! we offer good salary/benefits etc, but on the whole senior and mid-level devs seem to be contracting for our tech stack (React/Node) and that's a path I'm not particularly keen on going down.

edit: if anyone reads this and wants a job, I've put my email in my profile.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#250

Post by ryandrake »

nbardy wrote: post #223
jondubois wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Now someone who has 10 years AND cares is rare but pure gold. As someone who started programming from a young age and has almost 10 years of commercial experience, I have to say that being in this industry is horrible. If they promoted people using a random number generator, it would be a step up from what we have now. The most horrible thing is that in spite of your passion and experience, your ideas are constant…

The bias for promoting people who build massive card houses is frustrating. I've found myself cleaning up the mess my manager left behind pushing through whatever feature he used to get promoted countless times. And then getting pressure by that same manager when there is too much tech debt in the code base they left behind.

Most companies promote based on the surface level “what you did” rather than “how you did it”. It’s not going to change. Be glad you don’t work for one of those companies that promote based on who you’re friends with.
Post reply on HN