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

The real reason you can't hire developers....

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 271 posts

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#71

Post by sabat »

goodweeds wrote: post #66

1998 called and they want their resume blasts back. I find work (contracts) by looking for interesting companies whose money I would like to take, then I look them up on LinkedIN to see how connected I am to them. Sometimes I ask my friends to connect me to them, sometimes I just google stalk them to find the appropriate hiring manager's twitter address or email address, then I email them, whether or not they're hiri…

In a normal job market that's good common sense, but in the current tech job market, where unemployment is somewhere around 3%, resume blasting ought to be more than enough. The problem is that companies -- particularly larger companies -- are still in Arrogance Mode and think that the job-seekers need them. They don't.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#72

Post by waterlesscloud »

SeoxyS wrote: post #47

For what it's worth, I'm involved in the hiring process at chartboost.com. (Company tripled in employee size the past couple months!) When we get a resume / inquiry from somebody who wants to work remotely, it's instant rejection. Telecommuting is a long debate whose scope is outside of this discussion, but for a lot of companies that's a tough sell. Especially at 115k.

Are you having trouble finding developers?

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#73

Post by gatlin »

spwmoni wrote: post #68
gatlin wrote: post #23

I applied to a kind-of sinking ship in Palo Alto last year. Got through a few interviews, answered all the questions right, and was gently let down. It was a stab in the dark. My friend who worked there (and, in fact, recommended me) told me the developer doing the interviews has never actually recommended a single candidate and is no longer allowed to do interviews. This could still mean that I'm stupid and incompet…

>Also I did a fair amount of the interview on a rooftop, trying to quietly and safely get down without a ladder. Fun times. Wait, what? Unless this is some figure of speech I'm not familiar with, this requires some explanation.

I was enjoying the sunset when the interviewer called me. I was on the roof of one of several buildings; climbing on and off is a feat of acrobatics involving two roof tops and these slippery metal vents. Both hands are useful.

tl;dr somersaulted.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#74

Post by kls »

shadowfiend wrote: post #61
kls wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the be-all end-all, but it seems like a decent first-pass filter. It is really not, I have been round and round about this with every organization that I have been in that does these. The only thing it displays is the persons ability to answer trivia and solve puzzles. These are not the characteristics of a great developer, the characteristics of a great developer are simplicity, creativity and rapidly adapt…

Good to hear the input, actually. I haven't personally used the puzzle, I was just saying it seemed like a decent filter. Obviously I was wrong in my perception :)

Sure I was not trying to represent it as your view, just trying to highlight the deceptively simple but flawed reasoning in this hiring practice. People believe that because logic is involved having a trick logic puzzle will filter out bad candidates, but given the nature of development there are other more important qualities of a candidate such as creativity that are not tested and are not displayed in a logic puzzle. So you may filter out a guy that is not real strong on logic but is extremely creative. The creative guy is more important in 90% of the tech jobs out there, and further you only need one person strong on logic in the team because he can be consulted for tough logic, the creative guy cant be leaned on in the same manner to make the non-creative creative. The logic guy can't go to the creative guy and say hey give me a hand with being creative.

I believe Google hiring practices that favor these kind of logic puzzles is one of the reasons they have had such an issue innovating in the market place. An overwhelming focus on hiring the technically smartest guy in the room, by nature filters out the most creative guys in the room (it's a right brain, left brain thing). The trick is finding the guy that is right in the middle of the two.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#75

Post by arvcpl »

city41 wrote: post #43
loup-vaillant wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I expect to get paid $115K to lead a team as a senior developer, but don't want to relocate in order to be with the team. He targeted companies that claim to accommodate telecommuting. Not hire when being asked looks sneaky.

How often does telecommuting really jive with a senior/leadership position? If you're just coding away then sure I can see telecommuting being very viable. If part of your job is earning the respect of a team and being able to drive them and steer them in a direction, then not being physically there could very well be a huge barrier. Not to mention only really wanting telecommuting does potentially imply less commitm…

Well, actually one multi-million company I was working for had chief architect on telecommute basis and it worked really well. I suppose it's more about processes and company DNA. But I have to admit, I saw such case just once :)

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#76

Post by nirvana »

I think the fundamental problem is that companies want a "Sr. Software Engineer" with >7 years of development and >4 years of development in their particular language, who also is young enough to think that "Nerf guns" and "xbox's" [sic] are an appealing "Benefit" and that aren't going to ask anywhere near $115k a year. (a totally reasonable salary, by the way, but I think you lose edge in negotiations by putting that up front. What if they think you're worth $125k? They're now going to offer $110k and let you talk them up to $115k.)

Basically, companies want the impossible, and they are driven by a culture that is very out of touch with the market.

For instance, this is also why they're not so keen on telecommuting.

There are exceptions, of course. But when they can't hire according to their plan, they're going to tell reporters "there's a shortage of good engineers!" where "Good" means "recent college graduates with 7 years industry experience 4 years ruby experience who will work for $60k and nerf bullets."

I see posts like yours and think its a damn shame. You're missing out, and at least some of those 50 companies are missing out... its a lose-lose situation.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#77

Post by goodweeds »

sabat wrote: post #71
goodweeds wrote: post #66

1998 called and they want their resume blasts back. I find work (contracts) by looking for interesting companies whose money I would like to take, then I look them up on LinkedIN to see how connected I am to them. Sometimes I ask my friends to connect me to them, sometimes I just google stalk them to find the appropriate hiring manager's twitter address or email address, then I email them, whether or not they're hiri…

In a normal job market that's good common sense, but in the current tech job market, where unemployment is somewhere around 3%, resume blasting ought to be more than enough. The problem is that companies -- particularly larger companies -- are still in Arrogance Mode and think that the job-seekers need them. They don't.

The problem is that companies -- particularly larger companies -- are still in Arrogance Mode and think that the job-seekers need them. They don't

That's a big dish of good old american entitlement.

If you were on the market during the last boom, the demand for engineers was far greater than it was today. Because of that, for every 1 good resume that landed in my inbox I had to wade through about 300 bullshit resumes. Most of them were from Indian spam shops, kids in the midwest who got their MCSE and decided they were senior systems architects, and fratboy ivy-league types who felt the $200k that dad spent on their education meant they should be able to ride their degree onto the next big thing.

Treat your job hunt like it's a full-time job. You can probably coast your way into some me-too start-up, but if you want a good job at a company you're excited about it, you have to prove your worth by selling yourself.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#78

Post by alinajaf »

I think that if you're really keen to get a position, it's worth following up. People are busy, you get the wrong email address, there are a dozen reasons why your application may not have got to the person it needs to for the hiring process to begin.

Every job I've applied to directly has had at the very least one email and one call, potentially a follow up if they drag their heels. I've rarely failed to get an interview (though to be fair, I've only applied to 10-20 companies at a time, not the 50 the OP has).

I agree though that with all this 'lack of talent' the companies should be chasing us at the merest whiff of interest. Unfortunately people don't always act rationally in there own self interest, so we sometimes have to take the initiative.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#79

Post by mkopinsky »

up_and_up wrote: post #44
waterlesscloud wrote: post #35

A lot of comments here miss the point. 80% did not respond at all . They did not acknowledge his contact attempt in any way whatsoever. Not a canned response confirming contact, nothing. Nothing. I'm willing to bet very heavily on this representing complete incompetence at the organizations contacted.

"80% did not respond at all" This is prob the biggest point. Whats the problem? Even MEGA corp knows about autoreply emails.

When I was looking for a job I got some of those autoreplies, and IMO, they are worth nothing. I already got confirmation that the form (in some giant enterprisey applicant tracking system) was submitted, sending me an email does nothing for me. If you would let me know when a human sees my resume, that would perhaps be meaningful, but there's no way they'd go for that level of transparency.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#80

Post by mkopinsky »

gatlin wrote: post #73
spwmoni wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Also I did a fair amount of the interview on a rooftop, trying to quietly and safely get down without a ladder. Fun times. Wait, what? Unless this is some figure of speech I'm not familiar with, this requires some explanation.

I was enjoying the sunset when the interviewer called me. I was on the roof of one of several buildings; climbing on and off is a feat of acrobatics involving two roof tops and these slippery metal vents. Both hands are useful. tl;dr somersaulted.

Was this a telephone interview??
Post reply on HN