31–40 of 183 posts
Anyone care to comment on how the whole Triplebyte process goes as a person who wants to be hired? I'm interested since I never got past the set of questions due to some kind of bug in the beta.
Anyone care to comment on how the whole Triplebyte process goes as a person who wants to be hired? I'm interested since I never got past the set of questions due to some kind of bug in the beta.
I had a great experience, even as someone primarily working in embedded development. They only targeted SF & NY when I went through their process, which wound up unexpectedly being a dealbreaker for me, but if it weren't for that I absolutely would've taken one of their offers.
Edit: By the way, you should email them about the bug with your profile, they'd probably want to know about it / give you another shot.
Anyone care to comment on how the whole Triplebyte process goes as a person who wants to be hired? I'm interested since I never got past the set of questions due to some kind of bug in the beta.
After the initial quiz, I had a ~2 hours interview with a human, which included a 1h "pair programming" challenge, random technical questions on my field, general CS questions and architecture (system design) type of questions.
Once I passed that step, my talent manager (the person who helps facilitating the discussion with the companies) told me IIRC that about 1 in 5 passes the human test.
Based on my skill set and preferences, the system "offered" some 30-something companies, and I chose to have an introductory call with ~10 of them. Each company has some background information, what they're good for (in TripleByte's opinion), their general size and their engineering size. Some companies (the bigger names) have additional steps before the on-site, like another pair-programming session or take-home exercises.
From those calls, 5 on-site interviews stemmed, and 4 of those resulted in an offer. TripleByte also helped arranging the on-site all in the same week, so if you're remote you don't have to fly back and forth all the time.
Top notch service, imo
""The metric that companies care most about is what percentage of on-site interviews convert into hires, and the industry standard is 20 percent. Triplebyte’s placement rate is 40 percent," says Taggar."
> And we've now reached the point where our automated assessment substantially outperforms human interviewers at evaluating technical skill. What does this mean exactly? E.g. does the test successfully identify the people who have the best portfolios of things they’ve built previously?
Even with an algorithm doing the identification, any data produced is still going to be highly subjective (based on the "best portfolio" ideas of TripleByte and whoever worked on the algorithm).
> And we've now reached the point where our automated assessment substantially outperforms human interviewers at evaluating technical skill. What does this mean exactly? E.g. does the test successfully identify the people who have the best portfolios of things they’ve built previously?
Anyone care to comment on how the whole Triplebyte process goes as a person who wants to be hired? I'm interested since I never got past the set of questions due to some kind of bug in the beta.
I am a swe with 2-3 years of experience, maybe four depending on how you count experience maybe, speak at lots of large conferences, contribute to open source, etc. I feel (and have data to back up) like Triplebyte sold me as a 5-7 years experience person, so only got interviews with companies looking for senior people. Really got along great with all companies and I have historically been a great judge of how my interviews have gone, but I think Triplebyte overselling me essentially caused me to waste a week of my life. Feel free to handwave and say I am blaming Triplebyte for my failures (of which I have many), but I do think I would have had 1-2 offers otherwise. Although to be fair, the 130-140k comp most companies mentioned would be a significant pay cut and may not have been do-able for me even if I had received an offer.
I'll bite: Isn't using scientific methods in HR similar to stock trading? I.e. you need to predict how well a given person would fit within a company; you can't really capture significant soft abilities like who-knows-whom, which might have significantly bigger impact on profitability of the project than any individual/technical contribution if you purely optimize for profit. You also need to take into account compan…
As it happens, stock trading is a bad example of something scientific methods do not improve :)