On asking job candidates to code • Hacker News Board

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#71

Post by rco8786 » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:02 PM UTC

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

I read this as "8 hours at my day job". I.E., he worked a normal day and then went home to complete the interview challenge

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#72

Post by sixtypoundhound » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

The real problem here isn't coding interviews; its how we (hiring managers) approach the entire question.

The goals of a technical interview should be: - Confirm the credentials presented aren't complete BS - Validate they know enough to be immediately helpful - Assess their long term potential (brains, social skills)

Coding challenges tend to be good at the first two points but very questionable for the third. Incidentally, given that I'm seeing a 50% washout rate from a basic SQL code question (supported by confessions from candidates that they fabricated credentials/experience), you would be silly not to include some form of practical test.

The third point (potential) is best measured by talking with them about a project they really cared about. For those who cannot share work examples, pick a good side project. Don't get hung up on the content - focus on their passion. You'll get a better view of my capabilities if you chat with me about building an ad server, mobile optimization, or SEO analytics (real world projects I care about) than with a contrived example.

As for the github profile of code shrugs why? Seems like a bit of a cult to me. I'm happy to sharing anything that's useful (and do so on my blog) but don't have the free time to spend developing code for the sake of "work samples". My work samples run on production servers as commercial projects, thank you very much..... Suspect many other good candidates are the same.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#73

Post by aprdm » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

A startup in Berlin gave me a code challenge that would take at least 20 hours, I had even to deploy in specific version of the libraries, they give the datasets and etc.

I was very suspicious of being an actual feature development. I've said I would only do that if they would pay me to.

They answered that they feel very sorry for me because a lot of the candidates feel the coding challenge very challenging because they can learn new stuff and they love it

go figure

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#74

Post by hyperpape » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

IanCal wrote: post #56

macNchz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The time involved in these things really can add up... I was recently asked to do a take home challenge that took a couple of hours to hack together, followed by several hours of nailing down edge cases due to the nature of the task. Then the company scheduled a phone call during which I thought we'd discuss the design decisions I'd made while working on the task. Instead, the interviewer had never seen the code I se…

Often these things are scored and ranked separately. Your phone interviewer will likely have scored you on various things, the score from your coding challenge will be taken as well, then everyone will sit down and discuss how people did and rule people in/out.

That can be true, but it's still a waste.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#75

Post by JonoBB » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

For promising candidates, we ask that they complete a pre-specified project in their own time. The project takes most candidates 2-3 hours to complete.

The difference is that we do this as paid work. Whatever their going rate is, we'll match it.

A surprisingly high number of candidates interview quite well and look promising on paper, but fail horribly in a "real world" coding test.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#76

Post by JustSomeNobody » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #54

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

I, for one, am tired of processes that don't respect my time.

Would you rather Some Co. just hire you and try you out for a few months simply based on your resume?

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#77

Post by philbarr » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

I got laid off recently and was applying for all the jobs I could find. So I had to do a bunch of these programming projects. I don't mind them per-se, but it takes so long to do each one and you have to be ultra-clean with each one. I don't think companies take into account that you might not have that much free time. It's particularly stressful when you don't get through.

On pair programming tasks, I had a pair programming session with a guy, he gave me an empty project and a poorly specified brief, verbally, then gave me 15 minutes to crank something out. It was pathetic. I didn't get the job and the feedback was, "he didn't know some of the keyboard shortcuts I'd expect." In hindsight, I'm glad I didn't get that one but at the time things were getting desperate.

The best process was the one where I finally got a job. We talked on the phone for an hour and a half and by the end you could just tell we had that, "developer bond". His approach was the best I'd seen. He just talked through some of the problems he had, I proposed solutions and we talked through pros and cons. He treated me as an equal from the start. After that we had the face-to-face HR questions (how do you resolve conflict, etc.) which they have to ask because it's a big company, and another one with another manager but by then it was pretty much a done deal.

And I think that's the way to do a decent hiring process. Don't behave like an authoritative dick, and use phone interviews to screen candidates. Programming projects don't work because it's going to take you forever to review them, and pair-programming doesn't work because there's not enough time, and it's kind of horrible for the candidate.

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#78

Post by aprdm » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:12 PM UTC

patio11 wrote: post #57

Tunabrain wrote: post #9

> As brain-dead as I was after eight hours at my project, [..] Is giving out an 8+ hour programming project as part of the application process really considered good hiring practice? If you apply to five jobs, you're expected to spend an entire unpaid work week writing code that doesn't benefit anyone? If a company receives 20 applicants, their ideal candidate selection wastes a collective work month? I don't really…

(Speaking in personal capacity here.) There exists a continuum of hiring practices which place more or less burden upon candidates. I would encourage HNers with input into their company hiring practices to choose less burdensome approaches over more burdensome approaches, particularly when less burdensome approaches also yield additional signal about ability. A thing you can expect to be asked in 2016: you can expect…

Perfect, I've done +-4 onsite interviews and only got accepted in one of them. I get really nervous in on site interviews being judged by usually two people at the same time while I try to solve something.

One company in Amsterdam, just last week, I went through a four step process, the last one being the onsite interview. I did really well in the first two, but then in third I went with a wrong approach to the problem and couldn't get my mind in the right position again. The person judging me just kept putting pressure. I got really nervous and couldn't do any more interviews that day... my mind really got completely blocked for the rest of the day.

That happens and, really, the company spent so much time of me (and me on them) for everything to be decided on that? feels wrong..

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#79

Post by lmm » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:13 PM UTC

"Language standard library" seems like a very arbitrary standard to impose. Some languages have a very large one, others a small one. Wouldn't it be better to specify what "primitives" you wanted the code to use? (e.g. must use raw sockets vs. may use a http library vs. may use a basic json-parsing library vs. may use a full json object mapper)

Re: On asking job candidates to code

#80

Post by autotune » Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 2:14 PM UTC

vblord wrote: post #32

When we hire, after a few phone interviews we give the programmer an in person coding exercise that is very basic. Open a file and parse data, etc... They can use the internet. It's very basic. 80% of the candidates cannot do that. I'm not exaggerating. Maybe I'm missing something here, but it's pretty astonishing to me.

Do you require them to do it in a specific language or let them choose which one they are most comfortable with? How do you decide which programmers to bring onsite? Have you considered giving them different options in the from of doing a take home test or coming in and coding inperson instead?