If you're a startup, and you (the founders) have any sense at all, you will screen out candidates from "top 10" schools. As a startup, you have absolutely no business competing with Google / Facebook / et al engineering talent. This isn't even approaching anything like moneyball, it's just common sense. The idea that where someone went to school makes two shits of a difference in job performance is ridiculous. Job performance in technology is mostly about a collection of other soft skills in addition to grades and technical ability (communication, willingness / ability to learn new technologies, ability to work in quickly adapting work environments, etc).
We only hire the trendiest
551–560 of 728 posts
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#552Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The AWS teams managed to see the formal specifications are a good idea and have been better for it since. Can you elaborate on that?
If you can spare an hour, I recommend Leslie Lamport's talk at React San Fran 2014: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCRqE59VXT0 Where he shares some anecdotes from Chris Newcombe about Amazon's adoption of TLA+.
I can't now but eventually. Thanks.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#553Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many engineering/science-oriented schools have the same issue. Urbana Champaign, Ann Arbor, even CMU. If you are not from a STEM background, you tend to only "recognize" the Ivy League schools and MIT/Caltech/Berkeley/....
You have to really not care about your industry to not recognize Georgia Tech or CMU, birthplace of some of the greatest technical innovations in the industry. Let's talk about how you hire HR people. I've never interviewed for another company (always run my own), but I'd never hire a HR person who didn't have a basic understanding of tech.
Yet that seems to be standard for most recruiters. Do you have 6 years experience using Server 2012? My favourite question ever (made by a recruiter in 2010) was, do you have 8 years of experience programming Android? Or what's the difference between Java and Javascript? Gah...
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#554Earlier quoted context omitted.
A big long list of relevant but subjective traits is a perfect vector for bias to creep in. Take what you call "poker face", for example - how do you measure openness? By how well they make small talk? What if they're just nervous because of the interview; what if they experience social anxiety; or what if they're just an introvert, and don't tend to be open around new people? For a less trivial example, take "resour…
I agree about the possibility of bias creeping in. On the other hand, humans are biased, so understanding how to hire for success within your own (or your organization's) biases is useful. Some people would want the opposite candidate to the one I described. Resourcefulness is more of a mindset. New parent? OK, what have you discovered about childrearing that you didn't anticipate? What will you do differently next t…
> New parent? OK, what have you discovered about childrearing that you didn't anticipate? What will you do differently next time?
These are extremely inappropriate questions for a job interview.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#555Earlier quoted context omitted.
The HR involved must be applying cargo cult rules of thumb without understanding the actual rules and the work the company does (which is, unfortunately, distressingly common for HR organizations.) If the actual work you did was such that a work sample would be indistinguishable from an IQ test (which it isn't, for almost any real work anywhere, and you'd have to be ignorant of either what the work is or what IQ test…
Not only that, but there are several very large companies that do in fact use IQ tests during screening (that's a stupid policy, for what it's worth), so I'm pretty dubious about the claim that IQ tests are unlawful.
They are lawful when you can demonstrate a link between on the job performance and the IQ test. Given how g-loaded software development this should not be hard to show.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#556"When I started programming, I heard a lot about how programmers are down to earth, not like those elitist folks who have uniforms involving suits and ties. You can even wear t-shirts to work! But if you think programmers aren’t elitist, try wearing a suit and tie to an interview sometime. You’ll have to go above and beyond to prove that you’re not a bad cultural fit. We like to think that we’re different from all th…
There are a lot of down to Earth devs, but there's also some... how do I say this delicately? ... Assholes. These people grew up knowing they were smarter than average, but didn't learn to talk to an average. They always have to be the smartest person in the room. This person's sentences start with "Well, technically..." more often than not because you're dumber than they are.
A lot of us go through a period, when we're young, where we start correcting people because, well, we're smart and they're wrong. Most of us get over it and actually learn how to talk to an average (being able to accept when they are right and being able to STFU when they are wrong or explaining it delicately if it's actually something important). Mostly because we learn that an average hates to be corrected all the time. But also because conversations can be fun if you just don't worry about whether what people are saying is "technically" correct or not.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#557Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that unix folks don't appreciate it, but that it's not clear what to appreciate. From solely a personal standpoint, years of both using and programming on Windows taught me nothing about its values. However, I can talk about Apple and its values for hours and I've never owned anything Apple except its keyboard. Joel, the author of the article you linked to, states the core value of Windows as being "useful t…
"Aunt Marge will be as happy using Linux without even knowing it's Linux" Unless she wants to print something... [1] [1] http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cups-horror.html
You know that was written over a decade ago, right? Clearly, you're not using a Linux-based desktop on a daily basis, so please stop spreading FUD.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#558"Contractors are generally not the strongest technically" Where does this come from? I actually see a contractor as someone who had experienced way more "war stories" than the guy who has been sitting in the same chair for 10/20 years. As a contractor, you are exposed to more technologies, more business sectors, different working cultures.
I had a hard time getting recruiters to submit me for contracting gigs.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#559Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there is a lot of stigma on A- employees, FYI, contractors are v-.
They're both. a- for agency employees (working for companies like Volt). These are contingent staff (CSG), usually hired to augment teams of FTE. v- for vendor employees (like nvidia). These are typically are partners working along side MSFT to accomplish a shared goal. From my myopic viewpoint vendor employees seemed to get more respect than agency employees. Regardless, I did think it was generous of MSFT to allow…
I have not seen a single a- but I have seen plenty of v- from agencies. You may have outdated information.
Edit: And I'd think that partners from other companies would be given b-es, which is for "business guests".
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#560Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - rationality -- can this person admit to being wrong and speak about it authentically... can I imagine this person admitting to being slightly wrong and even very wrong about something and handling it gracefully. I think this is a super important characteristic for a great employee to have, but I don't know how reasonable it is to expect to see much of it in an interview. In an interview setting, the candidate is…
At the company I work at when we interview we tend to ask tougher and tougher questions until the candidate either starts spouting BS or replies that they don't know. BS is a no-hire.
This is basically how PhD qualifying exams work, as well as the defense to an extent.
You're welcome to guess or describe how you'd think about something, but you should be willing to clearly state when you're really out of your depth. It's important to note, though, that this isn't done adversarially; it's usually just a natural conversation that goes down a particular rabbit hole.