Hire people who aren’t proven • Hacker News Board

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#411

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 11:52 PM UTC

tomnipotent wrote: post #408

scarface74 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not being an asshole. He's probably stressed out and doesn't know how to cope well. Life is stressful, work is stressful. My manager and his manager are reasonable people but after my second assignment, they said I missed a requirement and that it was a “big f’ up”. Guess what? I found that refreshing after dealing with managers that beat around the bush and you had to constantly try to figure out what they were…

> they said I missed a requirement and that it was a “big f’ up” It's free to say things, doesn't make it true. Too often we assume because someone is in a position of power - or is wealthy - that whatever they say must be true. It's not. Sure, we have to nod our heads and pretend it is to keep the job but that still doesn't change the reality. Shit rolls down hill with exponential momentum. I've seen many instances…

It's free to say things, doesn't make it true

Well, when the requirement was in big bold writing as one of the key features on a PowerPoint slide...

I need a diverse group of people that I can collaborate with to get things done. If they can't keep their wits about, it's my job to deal with that issue and get them back on

That’s not a luxury you have as you move up the ladder - even if moving up the ladder is just being a real senior developer/architect (by knowledge if not by title).

My first job at 22 was as a computer operator trying to get my foot in the door was within 6 months build a custom, networked data entry system used to support a completely new department and a new line of business. Working at small companies, you don’t get the luxury of hiding within the bureaucracy. The one time that I did work at a large company, it was suffocating.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#412

Post by honkycat » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 11:58 PM UTC

I can't disagree with this person more.

More than anything have learned that education and training are hugely important and hiring to train leads to mediocre staff who think their two years of development work stack up to your 4 years of college and 6 years of professional experience.

They take forever to start writing productive code, if they ever bother leaning at all.

I will never hire someone without a degree or equivalent experience again. Even for Jr. roles

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#413

Post by nil_pointer » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 12:12 AM UTC

honkycat wrote: post #412

I can't disagree with this person more. More than anything have learned that education and training are hugely important and hiring to train leads to mediocre staff who think their two years of development work stack up to your 4 years of college and 6 years of professional experience. They take forever to start writing productive code, if they ever bother leaning at all. I will never hire someone without a degree or…

This strategy may weed out duds, but it will also occasionally overlook great people. One of the brightest engineers I know dropped out of high school and got a GED, but was obsessed with tech and practiced building things daily. He's 30 and a VP now.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#414

Post by threatofrain » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 12:22 AM UTC

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…

There are a lot of young people walking up the medical pathway, but their notion of the correct early path just doesn't involve "practicing medicine", but rather taking the right classes or getting pre-requisites like math out of the way.

Nobody is telling their kids to become a doctor by reading aimlessly about medicine.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#415

Post by willart4food » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 12:24 AM UTC

Yup! Tom Peters - of "In Search of Excellence" fame - advocated the same mantra back in the late 90's. Yes I am that old.

It makes for great copy. Really.

But then, when push comes to shove, the old search for a lego piece that fits with all the other lego pieces continues, so that there's the alibi.

It reminds me of IBM's "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM".

Life continues.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#416

Post by Aeolun » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 12:33 AM UTC

arkades wrote: post #329

luckydata wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking about the bad ones, the ones I hate to see. The friends I'm talking about are all excellent professionals. Passion matters.

No, I'm talking about 99% of docs 99% of the time. It's a job. It's a great job sometimes, but it's paperwork most of the time. For every hour we spend rounding in the morning - when we're given at best 2/3 of the time we need to actually do the bare minimum, and half the time we need to really talk to people - we spend another 1-2 hours (minimum) in a windowless room doing a pile of paperwork notating the hell out o…

It’s a pretty sad thing we have to describe such a soul destroying environment as par for the course for a job though.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#417

Post by Ocerge » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 12:38 AM UTC

sj3k wrote: post #407

stevenwoo wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happened when you asked for better compensation after a year?

Owners said they wanted to pay me more but couldn't afford to right now. Dangled a `maybe in 6months` in front of me.

Look out for yourself. If they can't bump your pay now, even without knowing the situation, I doubt they can in 6 months either. They also probably wouldn't hesitate to lay you off if they couldn't pay you what you make now.

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#418

Post by tomp » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 12:38 AM UTC

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.

You're not entirely wrong, but that's a very bitter interpretation.

A more charitable interpretation of "passion" would be... I'm nominally a Python & Scala programmer (according to my CV), but I can also competently talk about OCaml, Haskell, Rust, instruction scheduling, tracing JIT compiler implementation, propagating type inference, TCP stack, C memory model, register allocation, hardware concurrency primitives and ring 0 privileges.

Compare that to another Python programmer that once tried to convince me that when a C++ program tries to access unallocated memory "the computer just throws an exception".

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#419

Post by opportune » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 1:21 AM UTC

docker_up wrote: post #290

The problem that has happened at my company is that we take a "chance" on bootcampers or other people who aren't proven, we spend the time and effort to mentor and train them, pay them well, and then they turn around in 9-12 months and leave us for another company with their enhanced experience. It has happened 3 times so far, so we have stopped hiring bootcampers, and fresh grads and instead have started hiring peop…

Big companies deal with this too. The solution is golden handcuffs - create a vesting or well-defined bonus schedule that incentivizes them to stick around. At the very least, offer them a signing bonus that they have to return if they leave of their own volition in less than a year

Re: Hire people who aren’t proven

#420

Post by opcenter » Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

docker_up wrote: post #290

The problem that has happened at my company is that we take a "chance" on bootcampers or other people who aren't proven, we spend the time and effort to mentor and train them, pay them well, and then they turn around in 9-12 months and leave us for another company with their enhanced experience. It has happened 3 times so far, so we have stopped hiring bootcampers, and fresh grads and instead have started hiring peop…

It sounds like they don't have enough incentive to stay? I know some others have mentioned financial incentive, but really enjoying the work you're doing and the people you work with may be even more important.