My spiciest take on tech hiring

Post by yablak » Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 4:44 AM UTC

s17n wrote: post #19

glumreaper wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Addressed directly in TFA: "Drawing out the interview process is a thinly veiled attempt to launder this bias with a "neutral" process that they will likely disregard/overrule if it contradicts their personal preference. That doesn't mean that I think this sort of interviewing bias is good or acceptable, but I also don't think drawing out the interviewing process corrects for this bias either."

Yeah this part didn't make any sense to me - is he claiming that later interviewers will be heavily biased by talking to previous interviewers? If so, I think that's probably not as strong an effect as he's claiming, and its also easily correctable by just having interviewers not talk to each other. I do agree about the "you only need 15 minutes" part, but the solution there would seem to be replacing four hour long…

Post by flappyeagle » Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 4:44 AM UTC

foobiekr wrote: post #18

tptacek wrote: post #2

This is not a very spicy take. A spicier take is that you can hire people without administering any interviews at all. Hire like an orchestra: through an audition process, which, in a work setting, is also known as "work-sample testing". It works a treat.

What senior person wants to do this?

Post by passion__desire » Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 4:49 AM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #35

corimaith wrote: post #26

IMO, any strategy or attempt to filter out the "right" candidates can always be gamed that a change of culture is inevitable. Iron Law of Bureaucracy. You can delay it, but it will happen. Just look at Google today despite their massive investments in the hiring process. I think if you really want to preserve your culture long term, you need to start looking to exporting your culture outwards into general society rat…

Your solution is "change society" because you think that's easier than fixing your hiring process???

Post by geetee » Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 4:50 AM UTC

busterarm wrote: post #16

sfblah wrote: post #12

If you want to see a weird process, apply for a dev role at Meta. They appear to optimize for people who have either memorized leetcode or are really good at cheating. I’m in their process as a pretty senior dev mostly on a lark (I hate the company). I’m pretty sure the only way I could get hired is to cheat. Why would they want to hire folks that way?

It's weirder than that. For Meta's interview, how well you do on preparing specifically for their interview and trying to max out the specific metrics that they're judging you on isn't just tied to whether you get an offer or not but where in the scale they pay you. They care a lot less about what you've done and where you are in your career, mainly because most of the what and how of the job is fairly unique to Meta…

Post by busterarm » Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 4:52 AM UTC

corimaith wrote: post #26

IMO, any strategy or attempt to filter out the "right" candidates can always be gamed that a change of culture is inevitable. Iron Law of Bureaucracy. You can delay it, but it will happen. Just look at Google today despite their massive investments in the hiring process. I think if you really want to preserve your culture long term, you need to start looking to exporting your culture outwards into general society rat…