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

We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

blog.interviewing.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 181 posts

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#81

Post by maxxxxx »

Jemaclus wrote: post #5

> Furthermore, no matter what, poor technical ability seems highly correlated with poor communication ability – regardless of language, it’s relatively rare for candidates to perform well technically but not effectively communicate what they’re doing (or vice versa), largely (and fortunately) debunking the myth of the incoherent, fast-talking, awkward engineer. My interpretation of this is that interviewees who can c…

That's what I do. If I can have a meaningful conversation with someone about stuff he did or stuff I am describing most likely they will do well. If the conversation gets very vague or confusing most likely things won't work out.

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#82

Post by maxxxxx »

watwut wrote: post #24
lettergram wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually how I conduct interviews. It's been immensely successful at weeding out candidates within 5 minutes; although most interviews are 45 - 60 minutes. Basically, give them less than ten lines of code, ask them what it does, where are a couple bugs, ask what would you name the function, etc. Then we talk about how to improve it. I'd say, less than 20% of people I interview pass. It's actually amazingly low…

"Half the people don't even tell me what they are thinking." Maybe they are introverted or simply need to think before they talk. Around 50% of people are introverted (less in usa). Many people are like that and simultaneously quite skilled. Moreover, some environments punish errors, so people who worked/studied there tend to be conditioned to think before talking. "And no matter how many times I try to work with the…

If someone can't express himself, most likely that person won't work well in the team.

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#83

Post by gxs »

lettergram wrote: post #14
Jemaclus wrote: post #5

> Furthermore, no matter what, poor technical ability seems highly correlated with poor communication ability – regardless of language, it’s relatively rare for candidates to perform well technically but not effectively communicate what they’re doing (or vice versa), largely (and fortunately) debunking the myth of the incoherent, fast-talking, awkward engineer. My interpretation of this is that interviewees who can c…

That's actually how I conduct interviews. It's been immensely successful at weeding out candidates within 5 minutes; although most interviews are 45 - 60 minutes. Basically, give them less than ten lines of code, ask them what it does, where are a couple bugs, ask what would you name the function, etc. Then we talk about how to improve it. I'd say, less than 20% of people I interview pass. It's actually amazingly low…

That's an interesting approach, but I wonder if you're screening for people who can speak and code vs just people who can code.

I'm a product manager and I suspect I would do pretty well in this type of interview unless the snippet is especially complicated and/or esoteric.

In that case you might be screening for people who can talk but not actually code or people who can code but might not be the best communicator.

Interestingly enough, if youre optimizing for specific outcomes, you may not need to screen out the latter.

Engineers who struggle to communicate but are productive can be extremely successful given the right environment - including having someone on the team who knows who to work with various personalities and is technical enough.

Just some rambling, but it's worth pointing out given the scarcity of engineering talent. Not everyone is going to be Paul Bucheit, ace product manager and engineer all wrapped into one.

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#84

Post by ewjordan »

krzyk wrote: post #31
elgenie wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being able to successfully and clearly communicate their thought process about a simple problem one-on-one is a bad signal for being able to communicate clearly about a difficult problem in a group setting or being a useful sounding board for technical ideas.

Yeah, but if you shoot for elaborate ones you will get politicians/lawyers not coders. I don't have any source but from my experience mathematical/computer minded people are more likely to be introverted/talk less then arts people.

The article explicitly notes, though, that most excellent programmers were also excellent communicators.

Effective communication doesn't necessarily mean you talk a lot or are extroverted. It means that you say things that matter when they matter, and that is a crucial skill to have in almost any work environment.

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#85

Post by barrkel »

maxxxxx wrote: post #82
watwut wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Half the people don't even tell me what they are thinking." Maybe they are introverted or simply need to think before they talk. Around 50% of people are introverted (less in usa). Many people are like that and simultaneously quite skilled. Moreover, some environments punish errors, so people who worked/studied there tend to be conditioned to think before talking. "And no matter how many times I try to work with the…

If someone can't express himself, most likely that person won't work well in the team.

Some people take a bit of time and familiarity to warm up.

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#86

Post by mmcnl »

bluGill wrote: post #58
mmcnl wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that would be a perfect answer if you ask me.

No, it would not be a perfect answer, and could work against you: it shows you are not willing to work with me and assume some intelligence on my part (until proven otherwise) and thus you are potentially not going to work well with the rest of the team. I would respond that we have already profiled this code and discovered it is a bottleneck, now answer the question. It won't be hard to overcome the negative impress…

I fail to see why analyzing a problem before solving it somehow translates into "not going to work well with the team". Problem analysis skills are far more valuable than problem solving skills. Anyone can search on Google for a solution to a given problem, but no one on Google can tell you what the actual problem is. If you really thing the answer I was responding to is not acceptable, then the question is a lousy question imho.

"It doesn't make sense to hire smart people and tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do." - S. Jobs

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#87

Post by SomeStupidPoint »

Jemmeh wrote: post #52
DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in my case, there's a big difference between (a) discussing an open problem with a colleague, and (b) explaining what's going on in my mind as I'm attempting to solve the problem single-handed. I'm very effective at (a), and it's a skill that I've used many times as a software developer and/or grad student. But (b) is more typical in psychoanalysis sessions.

May I ask what you feel the difference in the two is? I often have to explain a problem to my coworker and vice versa. It's also really helpful when pair programming. Just curious about your experience.

There's a weird dynamic in interview questions you rarely, if ever, get in the workplace: the person who actually knows about the problem is staying quiet while the one just starting to reason through it is doing all the talking about it.

There's no back and forth -- you're not actually trying to help them solve anything -- it's someone who already knows the answer judging how much of it I can reason out in half-an-hour. I can't take 5 minutes to think it through, I can't stop talking for any significant amount of time without being told to narrate what I'm thinking about, etc. That's nothing like a workplace situation, where they'd be expect to hold up half the conversation, be providing input and thoughts on the problem, and I could just tell them I'd be with them in 15/this afternoon/tomorrow/etc.

It would be more realistic if the interview didn't get to see the question before the interview, either. (And why I think design questions work better than coding questions -- you can do something they're not expecting in the design, ask more kinds of questions about the spec, etc which cause an honest back-and-forth.)

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#88

Post by meggar »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #47
jghn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to take "relatively rare" a step further and viewed it as a myth. I'd get into debates with coworkers that all one needs to do is have a conversation with a candidate to fully judge their abilities. No need for coding tests or the typical questions. Unfortunately after we brought in a ton of candidates there were a few people who fell into this bucket. I have no idea how it happened but they couldn't code them…

That happened to me once, during a phone interview with Google. My brain simply froze during the live coding test. I looked like an idiot, even though the coding challenge was one I could have normally handled in my sleep. My guess is that it was due to anxiety about doing well on the interview. But to this day I'm gun-shy regarding live coding tests.

I did that at a Google interview too, on a variation of a question I'd practiced a few days before no less.

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#89

Post by 11thEarlOfMar »

Jemaclus wrote: post #5

> Furthermore, no matter what, poor technical ability seems highly correlated with poor communication ability – regardless of language, it’s relatively rare for candidates to perform well technically but not effectively communicate what they’re doing (or vice versa), largely (and fortunately) debunking the myth of the incoherent, fast-talking, awkward engineer. My interpretation of this is that interviewees who can c…

We do it in reverse. In the first 2 hour interview, candidates learn our tech from 2 or 3 engineers. We then send them home with a set of coding tasks that are all relevant to what we do. As in functions of utilities that we actually would need to write, as opposed to puzzles. They choose one of 6 tasks, write ~100 lines of code, then come back for the next 2 hour interview and lead a code review of the code they wrote. This approach allows them to take the same time and care they would if working for us, rather than putting them in an unnatural state of coding at a white board in front of one to n scowling veterans.

Engineers who are capable can clearly explain their coding choices and their style is evident. If they've borrowed too liberally or had someone else write it for them, it becomes apparent pretty quickly because they can't clearly explain the code they supposedly wrote.

This is a fairly new approach for us, but so far, the candidates have appreciated it and the team reports that this approach gives them a good sense of the candidates ability.

Re: We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

#90

Post by desdiv »

poikniok wrote: post #80
desdiv wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I'm nervous, I don't communicate well. When I'm nervous, I don't code well. I don't know about other people, but for me personally, when you measure me under a high-stress situation, all you are measuring is just my level of nervousness.

I must ask, did you get a university degree and if so how? Personally I have found interviews to be trivial compared to exams in school, so while I do get quite nervous for some of my math examinations I have never had this experience in interviews.

I have a CS degree from a first-tier school. My experience with exams and interviews is almost the exact opposite of yours.

In exams I don't get as nervous because I know that if I know the material then I will pass, if I don't then I won't. You can't bullshit your way past the professor/TA grading your exam.

But in interviews I know that people who are far better than me have failed[0], and that people less competent than me could get the job. So it's not my coding ability or my experience that's being measured here, it's something else. And I don't know whether I have that something else or not. Maybe I do, maybe I just don't.

[0] https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en

Post reply on HN