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

Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 69 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#51

Post by shmooth »

I'm currently doing the interviewing process. Fun.

I just finished a take-home assignment that I considered roughly "not completely sadistic", and it took me about 10 hours.

And there is some level of trust I have for the hiring company, etc., so I was comfortable doing the 10+ hours. Not happy, necessarily, but decided I wasn't going to try to change the hiring process while I was trying to be busy getting hired.

I could easily see someone spending 20-40+ hours on it, and still not completing it successfully. I was offered proactive help by the existing staff, which was super-nice of them, and it probably helped.

I'm not sure how long it was supposed to take.

I would generally guess that hiring companies think their take-home tests/assignments take about one-fifth/tenth of the actual time they take. They often are simple if you're an expert in the company's proprietary software platform.

I don't know what the difference is for remote vs. local hiring -- I'd guess the hiring is generally more tedious for remote positions -- they require more trust.

I'm generally in the sales engineer/tech acct mgr/tech support/other-type space. If I don't love the company, and I get a homework assignment that is 20+ hours, I usually bail.

I had another position I was working on that required a codility (?) test. I took the sample test and 'passed' it, or thought i did, but then the eval said i got a zero. So, not sure what that was about.

I ended up bailing on that position, or telling the company i'd do any other type of tech screen, including live coding, whiteboarding, etc., but they weren't for it. I said I'm not down with that tool, but it was over. Fine. I know better than to try to justifying my objection to these types of tests.

Lots of companies have been asking for recorded video interviews. I try not to voluntarily talk to robots. Again, I try not to object on 'dignity' or any other grounds -- it's not a language that 'we' commonly understand yet -- it's too sci-fi.

So "let the robots do it" is one strategy for hiring.

I think there are lots of sane things we can do to improve the hiring process, but one thing I'd generally like to see is an easier try/buy process (like traveling nurses seem to have).

In theory, contracting or contract-to-hire can make everyone's experience better, but...it just doesn't seem widespread in my experience.

For example, I would love the opportunity to work for some company for 2 or 3 months, at some percentage of my normal rate, and then if we both like, we agree to the full-time hire. But it seems everyone is deathly afraid of having to pay unemployment. That's the best guess I have for as to why this is not a more common practice. This arrangement or something like it would seem to offer a good mix of risk/reward for everyone involved.

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#52

Post by wolco »

ausjke wrote: post #47
steventhedev wrote: post #19

In a nutshell: they aren't. The economics of it are that in many places in the world, it is extremely difficult to fire an employee. Getting rid of an underperformer can take time, effort, and exposes the company to liability if the termination can be construed as relating to the employee being in a protected class (e.g. can't fire someone because she's a woman). Let's assume that it's a SF startup willing to play a…

for startup the hiring is US is tough, thought about hiring from Europe (remote) then got scared away by the labor law there. checking at Asia now, not because they're slightly cheaper(they still are, though to a less degree), but at least the labor law seems more reasonable, so yes, outsourcing not for just saving some money but mainly because of the employment rules are more reasonable for both sides.

Wouldn't you just offer a contract to anyone outside of the US? Treat it as a b2b contract?

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#53

Post by microtherion »

braythwayt wrote: post #32
steventhedev wrote: post #19

In a nutshell: they aren't. The economics of it are that in many places in the world, it is extremely difficult to fire an employee. Getting rid of an underperformer can take time, effort, and exposes the company to liability if the termination can be construed as relating to the employee being in a protected class (e.g. can't fire someone because she's a woman). Let's assume that it's a SF startup willing to play a…

I've been in this business for a very long time, and I have heard this my entire career from everyone except HR professionals and lawyers. First, in jurisdictions like Ontario, there is a probation period during which a new employee can be fired for no reason at all. They can be a top performer and still get fired, and they have no recourse. There are Ontario Human Rights exceptions to this, you can’t have a “Cowboys…

> When such things were in vogue, using bullshit a-hair-to-the-right-of-astrology tests like “How many weights do you need to use a balancing scale to...”

Ah, you're lucky to be living in such an enlightened society. In Switzerland you can still find employers who require handwritten applications because they have them evaluated by professional graphologists!

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#54

Post by wolco »

gtsteve wrote: post #29

My company is 100% remote so I have quite a bit of experience with being on the recruitment side. I think if there was a standard for recruiting that the industry followed, then people would just be thinking of ways to "hack" the standard, so I don't think that would be helpful. Remote working is desirable and rare but also a lot of companies that recruit for remote workers are very new ones and they often have no cl…

As long as there are clear expectations at each step I think that goes a long way.

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#55

Post by braythwayt »

microtherion wrote: post #53
braythwayt wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been in this business for a very long time, and I have heard this my entire career from everyone except HR professionals and lawyers. First, in jurisdictions like Ontario, there is a probation period during which a new employee can be fired for no reason at all. They can be a top performer and still get fired, and they have no recourse. There are Ontario Human Rights exceptions to this, you can’t have a “Cowboys…

> When such things were in vogue, using bullshit a-hair-to-the-right-of-astrology tests like “How many weights do you need to use a balancing scale to...” Ah, you're lucky to be living in such an enlightened society. In Switzerland you can still find employers who require handwritten applications because they have them evaluated by professional graphologists!

That kind of thing leaves me scratching my head.

BTW, don’t scratch your head. It throws off the phrenological screen.

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#56

Post by steventhedev »

braythwayt wrote: post #32
steventhedev wrote: post #19

In a nutshell: they aren't. The economics of it are that in many places in the world, it is extremely difficult to fire an employee. Getting rid of an underperformer can take time, effort, and exposes the company to liability if the termination can be construed as relating to the employee being in a protected class (e.g. can't fire someone because she's a woman). Let's assume that it's a SF startup willing to play a…

I've been in this business for a very long time, and I have heard this my entire career from everyone except HR professionals and lawyers. First, in jurisdictions like Ontario, there is a probation period during which a new employee can be fired for no reason at all. They can be a top performer and still get fired, and they have no recourse. There are Ontario Human Rights exceptions to this, you can’t have a “Cowboys…

How many people have you hired with you as their direct manager? How many of those have you had to fire?

I've only had to fire one person, but it was as a part time homework checker. I've only been personally responsible for 3 FTE hires in my career (beyond CV screen). I'm not the most qualified person to talk about actual hard data points on the importance of success in the hiring/firing process.

However, I do screen CVs and I've seen several thousand of those so we can imply some data from other companies experiences. I'd say maybe 5% pop out as truly problematic people who jump jobs more than once a year. There's another 10% who have been at their current job for less than a year. The overwhelming majority of those 10% are leaving because the role isn't what they were told it would be (they are pure backend dev's being forced into a frontend role, different tech stack, QA job advertised as devops, etc). The next 60% work at each job between 2 to 4 years and leave because they got bored, or weren't allowed to grow, or they were asked to work harder than they feel they should have to. The rest leave because the business closed or similar circumstances. While some of these people may be lying about the reason they're leaving, I don't think they'd lie about the amount of time they worked somewhere.

So what makes someone a bad hire? The obvious ones you can easily filter for in your hiring process. The ones that cause the conventional wisdom of "firing is hard" are the ones who just barely scrape by, draining the team with extra training, extra work, extra bugfixes, extra "oops" moments for the longest time. They're the ones who go on a PIP and improve enough that it's difficult to justify firing them with cause. The reason "firing someone is hard" isn't because the process itself is hard. It's because the ones you need to fire, the ones you're warned against, they're just a bad fit. They take up an extra desk and shorten your runway (or budget) while providing just barely more than what they cost. It's the opportunity cost of hiring someone who's not great but not horrible. The actual cost of firing an underperfomer is 2 or 3 months salary equivalent depending on contract/jurisdiction.

So we're stuck with "a-hair-to-the-right-of-astrology" because it's really difficult to filter reliably, and an amazing worker on the right team could be "meh" on the wrong one (for him/her). It may be bullshit but at least it's bullshit the entire team believes in.

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#57

Post by mooreds »

anotheryou wrote: post #50

At least I can weed out companies with bad hiring practices. They team can't be much better than how they hire. Having a remote interview with really bad audio, no word on their product, no small talk, just questions without discourse or feedback on my answers? - No thanks. I'm a bit torn on assignments and trial days. I think they should simply be paid.

At the company for which I work, we definitely pay something for the take home assignment. Not a ton. It's less a "this is what you'd get paid as a contractor" and more "this is a recognition that you are spending some free time on this and we appreciate it".

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#58

Post by mooreds »

mharroun wrote: post #35
reallydontask wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you work with such an extremely static stack that it requires no further learning? I would say that one of the most important qualities a developer can have is the ability to learn. Perhaps, you expect all the learning to be done outside of work?

I lead product and engineering orgs in startups, so yes I make sure our -core- tools remain static as possible. I never claimed learning is not important, if anything I supported that in my comment in hiring eager jr's. My point being is if I am hiring someone "experienced" I need someone who can mentor others, own projects, and help drive our current products forward. If that person will need to come in and learn th…

I hear you. There are so many kinds of senior developers. Wrote a blog post about it:

http://www.mooreds.com/wordpress/archives/2812

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#59

Post by dlphn___xyz »

kaoD wrote: post #13
dlphn___xyz wrote: post #5

why would you choose to work remote - are you retired? no jobs available in your immediate area?

Why do you ask that? I work partial remote and every day I go to the office I wish I was fully remote... not because I hate the office (I love it, and really enjoy my co-workers) but because I hate commuting.

Partial remote or designated telework days make more sense than being fully remote.

However, it seems like you're exchanging any future/potential at a company for the convenience of working remote which why i was asking if he was retired.

Re: Ask HN: Why are hiring processes flawed and testing random standards?

#60

Post by ausjke »

wolco wrote: post #52
ausjke wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for startup the hiring is US is tough, thought about hiring from Europe (remote) then got scared away by the labor law there. checking at Asia now, not because they're slightly cheaper(they still are, though to a less degree), but at least the labor law seems more reasonable, so yes, outsourcing not for just saving some money but mainly because of the employment rules are more reasonable for both sides.

Wouldn't you just offer a contract to anyone outside of the US? Treat it as a b2b contract?

no you can hire a group of them, rent an office and designate a tech leader, then do some simple paperwork and set up payment flow and you're ready to go. You don't need consider age/gender/affirmative-action/minority/LGBT-rights and worry about being sued somehow for whatever strange reason, you just hire whoever from the market that wants to do the job, and pay them on time with best intention and follow the common sense rules.
Post reply on HN