[HN Gopher] Things I was asked to do while job hunting
___________________________________________________________________
Things I was asked to do while job hunting
Author : apozem
Score : 88 points
Date : 2021-04-10 17:40 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.kylenazario.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.kylenazario.com)
| beforeolives wrote:
| Should we interpret a problematic hiring process as a red flag
| about the company in general? Any stories showing the opposite
| (i.e. poor hiring process at a great company to work for)?
| kemitche wrote:
| Generally, I'd say no, but it probably depends on the types of
| problems.
|
| Companies have areas of expertise and areas of weakness - their
| hiring process might be a weakness, but that doesn't
| necessarily mean that working for the company will be all bad.
|
| That said, the hiring process is a view into the company
| culture, and if the view of the culture you get is not good,
| then working for the company is probably not going to be great.
| ghaff wrote:
| Without naming names, good companies can absolutely have sub-
| optimal hiring processes (at least in some cases) for various
| reasons. I didn't experience it. But then I didn't go anywhere
| near normal channels.
| ab_testing wrote:
| Honestly reading about this ,none of this sounds any bad. There
| are worse interviews where you make videos of yourself answering
| questions about yourself and posting them on anonymous servers.
|
| Then on the other side of the spectrum is the whole leetcode
| thing where you solve 3-4 leetcode hard questions in 45 minutes
| while someone is staring and judging you for asking
| clarifications on questions.
| BlargMcLarg wrote:
| Personality tests are really not ok for a multitude of reasons.
| Almost always are they used to eliminate outliers or fish for
| personalities which are almost similar to the ones already
| present. Extremely ironic, as many personality tests emphasize
| people of different strengths cover weaknesses as long as they
| don't clash (personal favorite: companies only hiring happy-go-
| lucky people who won't question things, and then wonder why they
| critical issues aren't found).
|
| Also, companies who "want to hire for inclusivity" but then
| eliminate candidates based on a few petty personality differences
| screams the opposite of inclusivity.
| voiper1 wrote:
| >The cognitive test actually made me laugh. Imagine a workplace
| where someone yells, "Nazario! Get over here, we need someone add
| some fractions! No calculators!!!"
|
| Wait, that person calling him over must be an imposter - surely
| they had to pass the same cognitive test!
| ajcp wrote:
| It's actually just a long-con truth test to easily catch any
| false-positives that got through the process ;)
| candiddevmike wrote:
| How I hire: review applications and any portfolio attachments or
| links (yes, putting links to prior work on resumes is a good
| idea!). I then take the top 5 candidates out to lunch (pre COVID)
| or virtual face to face. This meeting isn't an interrogation,
| it's a conversation between adults to see if there is a good
| overlap with my needs and your needs. I typically ask
| philosophical, open ended questions, many of which have no
| relevance to the domain I'm hiring for. If this goes OK, I
| prepare an offer with a 14-30 day contract period to make sure
| they can do the work and the work is what they want to do. After
| that, I let them be hired on or continue contracting.
|
| Astute readers will notice I don't consult with anyone underneath
| me--I may have them review anonymized applications or meeting
| notes, but I think having the peers you'll work with involved in
| the hiring process causes too much nepotism, cargo culting, and
| embarrassing displays of "stump the chump". As a leader, I know
| the skills I need, and I know who will jive with the team
| structure. I don't need people wishing I had hired X over Y or
| turning down people that may be smarter than them.
| gkoberger wrote:
| Wow, I don't know exactly why, but this made my skin crawl.
|
| There's so many red flags. I hate these philosophical
| questions, you're just trying to prove you're clever. I hate
| contract periods, it's just firing people with cover. I hate
| that you make these decisions unilaterally, you clearly think
| you're good at hiring but this just means you're not asking
| others to help with your blind spots. You refer to yourself as
| a leader, which just makes me cringe.
|
| But most importantly, you clearly have no respect for your team
| because you don't believe they can interview without being
| horrible humans. If nothing else, wouldn't the candidates want
| to meet their peers?
|
| Everyone's allowed to hire however they want, and that's a good
| thing... means there's lots of jobs for different types of
| people. But I have a strong feeling you have high turnover and
| a pretty bad company culture based on the way you talk. Or,
| you've never really built a team, just hired a few one-off
| people.
|
| If you're reading this, please don't hire this way.
| BlueGh0st wrote:
| Most of these are only red flags if you're hiring robots and
| not people.
|
| I generally have very little professional experience in the
| fields that I apply for and no education so, for me, getting
| hired has usually been a matter of showing that I have a work
| philosophy that aligns with the goals of my peers and an
| ability to quickly learn the actual work.
|
| I think your view on this comes from a bit of privileged
| perspective where you're looking moreso to fulfill
| contractual obligations in a field that you've already proved
| yourself in and not one where you're looking for a culture-
| fit that fosters development.
| jasonpeacock wrote:
| So...there's no data involved in your decision to hire, it's
| entirely based on non-job-related philosophical questions.
|
| There's also no review - you mention wanting to avoid nepotism,
| cargo culting, etc. but how do we know that _you_ aren 't doing
| that?
|
| How do you ensure you are not applying bias (unconscious or
| not) to your hiring?
|
| Studies have shown that most people hire people who are like
| them, which reduces diversity - and studies have shown that
| diversity is a net benefit to teams.
| ajcp wrote:
| > review applications > portfolio attachments or links >
| prior work > overlap with my needs and your needs
|
| Maybe not exhaustive or rigorously scientific, but seems like
| there are plenty of valid data points that can be collected
| from these activities.
| em-bee wrote:
| nepotism is a problem for me if people below me do it against
| my interests. it's also a problem for my superiors if i do it
| against their interests, but it is in my control and my
| responsibility so if i mess that up i have to deal with it
| myself.
|
| the best way to avoid bias is to get recommendations from
| people outside who do not benefit from my choice.
|
| if i hire people like me then asking those same people who
| else to hire will not help to improve diversity. the only way
| to improve diversity is to explicitly select for it. asking
| the team won't make much difference here.
|
| the only time where asking the team is useful is when i want
| to make a technical evaluation, but even there i need to be
| careful that the feedback does not allow team members to
| reject candidates who are better than them.
| RHSeeger wrote:
| A lot of what you're saying translates, at least in my
| reading of it, to "I don't trust the people that work for
| me". I don't know that I could work with a team like that.
| jasonpeacock wrote:
| It's worse..., it's: "I don't trust people that work for
| me, but my leadership should trust me".
|
| There's no reciprocity of respect going on, it's all
| about "I'm perfect and everyone else is broken".
| syngrog66 wrote:
| I like your system.
|
| I dont think theres any one perfect foolproof system but yours
| is closer to the "more good than bad" end.
|
| I agree having their potential coworkers interview them is
| tricky and prone to traps. There are upsides to it, but
| downsides too -- depends on those individuals. For an
| applicant, one is very much walking thru a minefield where just
| one misstep or "thumbs down" can blow it up, and if that
| happens one's time gets wasted, and both sides can miss out.
| Its fine to result in "legit" rejections, but an ideal system
| tries to minimize the chance of bogus ones.
|
| its tricky
| Kluny wrote:
| Wow, that makes too much sense. It must be illegal.
| cornel_io wrote:
| The problem with that strategy is mainly just that you lose
| access to the best candidates, who won't accept a period of
| offer uncertainty because they have as many other solid
| offers as they care to take interviews. You run the real risk
| of biasing your process towards the worst candidates, who are
| constantly on the job market and are happy to take any shot
| they can get; that said, you also lessen the risk of one of
| those people getting into your company as a full hire, so it
| isn't all bad.
|
| It's a great way to do "fresh out of school" hiring, though,
| where there's no meaningful signal to look at (grades and
| school are trash) and good people aren't self-selected out
| the way they are later.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| When you work with international applicants, it's not worth it
| (and not possible) to do their visa work for 30 days contracts.
| Most people won't relocate on the basis of 30 days contracts.
|
| So this process doesn't really scale to companies competing for
| talent globally.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| I've always worked on remote teams, so I don't see this as a
| problem (YMMV if you're onsite).
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| The obsessed guys devouring computer science books and
| maniacally solving leetcode exercises 24x7 are not going
| for a remote job. They want to change their life.
| pavel_lishin wrote:
| I don't think I'd be too thrilled, as a team member, with
| having zero input into the folks I'd be working with.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| Funny. Just yesterday a young friend of mine was complaining
| about people who ask open-ended, philosophical questions that
| don't have anything to do with the job at hand. Some people
| over-analyze and then freeze on that kind of question. Doesn't
| mean they can't do the job.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| Sure, it might not mean they can't do the job. But it might
| indicate they don't like working under pressure, they don't
| like learning new skills, they don't like working with women,
| or any other kind of bias or preference everyone has.
| yokaze wrote:
| I get the first one (under pressure), but how do you get to
| the other ones?
| candiddevmike wrote:
| You don't, not always. They are just examples of the kind
| of stuff you find out when you talk candidly with people.
| The kind of stuff no one puts on their resumes, but when
| you ask philosophical and hypothetical questions
| unrelated to the job you tend to find them.
|
| Not all of them are bad, and some of them can be fixed,
| but it's naive to think the only relevant discussions are
| related to skills.
| ipaddr wrote:
| It sounds like you are looking for a friend.
| watwut wrote:
| Wtf that has to do with working with women? Asking as woman
| whose e experience definitely is not that people must be
| philosophizing to be able to work with me. Nor comfortable
| with open ended questions.
|
| In fact, plenty of women themselves would fail this test.
|
| There is also nothing about your hiring that would not be
| biased. This sort of "let's chat and see how we feel about
| it" is the most biased way of inteviewing - it tends to
| produce hires that are from similar background, preferences
| and personality as interviewer.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| I've met and worked with quite a few engineers who aren't
| comfortable working around women. They're typically very
| dismissive of them. Some conversation topics that surface
| these kind of details revolve around their experience
| with diverse teams and their opinions on meritocracy.
|
| Again, as I said in a separate thread, I don't have a
| standard checklist of questions and just go with the flow
| of conversation.
| stefan_ wrote:
| It turns out you are right, this certainly did end up
| telling us a lot about _you_.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| I'd ask you to expand on this but I'm not sure I'd care
| for the answer. If you're judging me because I wouldn't
| want to hire folks who can't work with women, you may
| need some self reflection.
| stefan_ wrote:
| Did it again! I think you are mostly looking to hire
| _yourself_.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| So basically you do a variation of personality quiz except
| "informal" and then fire candidate after a month if they don't
| work out. I don't know where your market is but where I am you
| simply won't be able to hire anyone with options unless you
| have netflix level pay or super hot domain.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| Most companies have some kind of probationary period, either
| formally or informally.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| That is incorrect. In 13 years the fastest I've seen anyone
| let go was 6 months. Most sw eng jobs don't expect you to
| be fully productive for a quarter at least. Again once word
| gets out that you're trigger happy on firing you're looking
| at top of market pay to close anyone half decent
| ghaff wrote:
| Defaults matter though. Hiring someone and having an
| informal probationary period feels a lot different from
| giving someone a contract with no guarantee of a job at the
| end.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| There is a guarantee of a job at the end of the contract,
| I think you're arguing semantics.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| What's the point of the contract then, just to make
| things complicated?
| candiddevmike wrote:
| In the US, it's easier to end a contract than fire
| someone (unemployment, COBRA, taxes).
| ipaddr wrote:
| Making it easier makes it less secure than a normal full
| time position. The only candidates who would apply would
| be people out of work.
| ghaff wrote:
| In other words, there isn't a guarantee? Also, how is
| health insurance handled since you mention COBRA? I was
| on another thread today where people were saying that
| health insurance is one reason they didn't take time off
| between jobs.
| itronitron wrote:
| Given a choice, I'd recommend taking the contract period
| because if either party chooses to end the relationship,
| the candidate can honestly report it as a short term
| contract on their resume.
| ghaff wrote:
| To a first approximation, no one is looking at employment
| gaps at that level of granularity. Now if you can't find
| a job for another year, that's maybe something different
| but you're back to switching jobs without really having a
| job.
| zdragnar wrote:
| COBRA lets you continue your insurance plan from your
| employer for a time period after you leave.
|
| However, your employer no longer contributes to the
| premiums, which are very difficult to personally front if
| you dont have an income.
|
| You can buy temporary health insurance to cover yourself
| between jobs, but it typically is only useful for
| catastrophic injury, as the deductibles are extremely
| high to keep the price down.
| AlexCoventry wrote:
| Usually when I've been offered this arrangement (which I
| like because it reduces the risk on my side, too), the
| pay has been on the higher side for the contracting part,
| to cover the reduced benefits/security.
| TheCoelacanth wrote:
| So basically you just want to shift the risk of a bad
| hire onto the employee. The things you're avoiding are
| precisely the things that make it easier for them to
| bounce back if the new job doesn't work out.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| As someone mentioned below, the contract period typically
| comes with a higher hourly rate. Also, some candidates
| have been able to take a leave of absence or PTO from
| their current job, work the contract, then give two weeks
| notice after it works out.
| ghaff wrote:
| Unless I were already out of work, a contract period would
| pretty much be a non-starter--unless, as you say, it was
| really exceptional and I was able to confirm to my
| satisfaction that just terminating after the contract period
| was something very out of the ordinary. But it's very
| unlikely I would leave a position I was reasonably happy with
| for something like this.
| belinder wrote:
| Would have liked to have seen in the article what this 'sane,
| speedy hiring process' was
| apozem wrote:
| I wanted to keep my post short but it was a couple rounds of
| interviews.
|
| - Initial phone screen explaining my career
|
| - Technical conversation with team lead where we talked about
| the tools that would be used in the job
|
| - Soft skill screen where we talked about how to handle
| workplace scenarios
|
| - Final interview with cofounder with some technical content,
| some cultural
| throwawayboise wrote:
| > Pass a cognitive test asking me to do basic arithmetic and
| convert fractions as fast as I could.
|
| I would fail this. I have had a lifelong inability to do simple
| arithmetic mentally. When I had to learn multiplication tables I
| finally memorized them by using flash cards and a payment
| schedule set up by my parents.
|
| In fourth grade we had "time tests" where you had to do a page of
| sums and were graded based on how quickly you completed it. I
| never finished them in the maximum time allotted because I had to
| count on my fingers. Even today I will sometimes do that, or I
| will use offsets from a few sums that I do know. For example,
| 7+6. For some reason I know 7+7 is 14, so 7+6 is one less than
| that. Hence 13. Anyone else think this way as an adult?
| ergot_vacation wrote:
| It's both relieving and stunning how accurate this is to my own
| experience. I did TERRIBLE in high school (and college) math,
| almost entirely because I would constantly make little mistakes
| in the basic arithmetic. The broader concepts? No problem. But
| then I'd try to do a problem, slip up a few times on the basic
| math, and get the wrong answer. And there went the points (and
| test). I took to calling it "Math Dyslexia," although they're
| only really similar in that both involved unusual last-mile
| problems rather than fundamental knowledge or intelligence
| issues.
|
| I suspect you won't reply, this being a throwaway, but was
| there any ADHD involved? That's what I've gradually settled on
| for myself, not the "bouncing off the walls" bit, but the bit
| where you have trouble focusing on anything but the things that
| are "interesting" to you (and then HYPER focus on those
| things).
| lamontcg wrote:
| Sounds a bit more like you may have dyscalculia:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyscalculia
|
| I think what the prior poster was describing is more what I
| have which I've taken to calling "having shit memory". Can't
| remember numbers or names, can't learn foreign languages well
| at all. Had trouble in elementary school with doing
| multiplication tables fast because I couldn't memorize 7s and
| 8s, so I'd solve 8x8 by doing 6x6=36 (easy) and then
| 36+6+6+8+8 to complete the square.
|
| I can teach myself optimal control theory, but my speed and
| accuracy at arithmetic is just getting worse as i can use
| google as a calculator. I did fine in physics and math
| courses in college because you can use calculators, and
| because I always picked the easy questions first, and then
| ran the answers back through to prove they were right in
| order to find sign errors and such.
| cutemonster wrote:
| What about probability calculations? Like, calculating how
| likely X is to happen Y times in a row? If you can use
| calculators
|
| Btw from that Wikipedia article, about ADHD:
|
| > In 2015, it was established that 11% of children with
| dyscalculia also have ADHD
| fermentation wrote:
| I also had trouble memorizing arithmetic/multiplication tables.
| To this day I have no idea what 7*8 is (I can spend a few
| seconds figuring it out but I just never memorized it like most
| people). For some reason my university math courses disallowed
| calculators, and I vividly remember sitting in my Calculus III
| course counting those "number dots"[0] on every exam.
|
| [0]:
| https://64.media.tumblr.com/uwQaNeR4EjfyqysnvQFexD3vo1_400.j...
| ergot_vacation wrote:
| Exact same thing here. I'm actually having a moment realizing
| this is more common than I thought. Everyone always acted
| like it was the easiest thing in the world (even the ones
| that hated math) and that I must have brain damage or
| something. But to this day, if you put a gun to my head, I
| could not tell you what 7*8 was in any less that a minute
| (and possible not at all without some paper to work it out).
| cutemonster wrote:
| You don't happen to work with software anyone of you? I
| wonder if this "math dyslexia" has caused any tricky
| situations at the workplace
| stordoff wrote:
| I never bothered learning them either (apart from the
| squares, which stuck quickly for some reason) - I just got
| fast enough at working them out from known values (squares,
| 10x is trivial, 5x is half of that) that no one could really
| tell the difference. I think it actually helped me in some
| ways, because those "tricks" (mentally breaking it down into
| simpler steps) generalise to larger numbers quite well.
| sneak wrote:
| I'm in the same boat. 8*7 is naturally 8 squared (64) minus
| 8. :D
| Ekaros wrote:
| Or 7 squared (49) plus 7. Which for some reason is stuck in
| my brain...
| Kluny wrote:
| Think 5-6-7-8. 7 times 8 is 56.
|
| Or use a calculator, who cares. Arithmetic is mostly
| memorization.
| pavel_lishin wrote:
| I don't understand how those number dots are supposed to help
| with multiplication.
| angelbar wrote:
| 12+1 for me ;-)
| RedEdward71 wrote:
| Same here brah. I use finger tricks for much of my quick on-
| the-spot arithmetic. When I was young(14-24) I could do it in
| my head, as the years went on I started to rely on some rote
| memorization and the aforementioned finger shortcuts. These
| days (in my 50's) I unabashedly use the shortcuts and don't
| care what wtf anyone thinks...of course the gray in my beard
| stops most people from razz'in me.
| [deleted]
| sneak wrote:
| Yes this is how I do the compression of the multiplication
| table in my head as well. I'm great on the perfect squares, 2,
| 4, 9, 10 - there are big holes in the rest, and I just add or
| subtract from values I do know.
|
| Fortunately I don't need to use my fingers.
| onion2k wrote:
| I honestly hate interview tests like this because you _never_
| want a developer to do this in their day to day job. Code needs
| to be clear and simple to be maintainable, so anywhere a
| developer has done work in their head and just put in a magic
| number (eg const foo = 763; // I did the math in my head) you
| would always reject that in a PR and ask them to show where the
| number came from.
|
| If anything being asked to do mental arthimatic in an interview
| should be a red flag that the company has a code base that
| could be full of _horrible_ undocumented nonsense.
| josephg wrote:
| Yeah; or it's a sign they just have terrible judgement. "What
| makes a good programmer? Programming is like math right?
| Let's assess that!?"
|
| The trick for code readability is to always make the compiler
| do the math. const time_ms = 30 * 1000; This is much easier
| to read and maintain.
| [deleted]
| unanswered wrote:
| > For some reason I know 7+7 is 14, so 7+6 is one less than
| that. Hence 13. Anyone else think this way as an adult?
|
| I also reason 7+6 by going down or up from 14 or 12, but I
| would not characterize myself as having dyscalcula of any
| severity.
| the_af wrote:
| I have trouble with basic arithmetic as well, never learned the
| multiplication tables and employ all sort of tricks like the
| one you mention. I still blank out when someone wants me to do
| basic arithmetic on the spot. It's a bit embarrassing.
| crocsarecool wrote:
| Oh gosh me too!! I'm so embarrassed to do mental math. Unless
| I have a pen and paper or use of my fingers, I can't do it.
| It feels like the numbers start disappearing from my head as
| soon as I start calculating.
| cutemonster wrote:
| Does this happen also if your're at home alone, and trying
| some arithmetics?
| dblohm7 wrote:
| > In fouth grade we had "time tests" where you had to do a page
| of sums and were graded based on how quickly you completed it.
| I never finished them in the maximum time allotted because I
| had to count on my fingers. Even today I will sometimes do
| that, or I will use offsets from a few sums that I do know. For
| example, 7+6. For some reason I know 7+7 is 14, so 7+6 is one
| less than that. Hence 13. Anyone else think this way as an
| adult?
|
| When it comes to adding and subtracting, that's definitely me!
| SixDouble5321 wrote:
| Memorization of numbers generally, but yes to the above.
| ear7h wrote:
| > I finally memorized them by using flash cards and a payment
| schedule set up by my parents.
|
| This was my exact experience learning to the multiplication
| tables in 4th grade. Although my payment was watching tv or
| playing video games. The only one I really learned was
| multiplying by 8 bc my dad made more effort for me to learn it
| (he was programmer).
|
| I also use random "tricks" for arithmetic, like when
| multiplying 6 and 7, I'll do (3 _7)+(3_ 7) instead because I've
| memorized 3*7=21 and the addition is easy with no carries
| vagrantJin wrote:
| I just abhor the fact that teachers never gave students the
| intuition to approach problems and solve them. Not that I
| blame them - but my eyes watered when a visiting lecturer
| derived formulas we'd used in High school and told to
| memorize as absolute truths without knowing why. You finally
| get to appreciate mathematics as a discipline and a tool.
| ghaff wrote:
| One of the problems, especially but not exclusively at the
| high school level, is that you often haven't been exposed
| to the math (or other foundational information) that you
| need to derive things from more or less first principles.
| Physics is probably the most obvious example. You need
| Calculus to derive many of the formulae in high school
| physics but the average student probably hasn't had
| Calculus yet so they're just equations to memorize.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| This is why I think a lot of pre-collegiate curricula is
| misguided. The ultimate goal of a high school science or
| math course should be to teach logic and critical
| thinking ("learning how to learn"). If a student doesn't
| have the ability to understand why a formula works, we
| should take a hard look at why we're teaching it, even if
| that means radically rethinking which subjects are
| offered.
| ghaff wrote:
| I don't disagree.
|
| Math is the real challenge though. When I was in business
| school I tutored a group of students who were...
| struggling. They simply lacked the ability to handle
| things like basic graphs in economics, solving equations,
| never mind the most simple differentiation to find a
| maxima/minima. It was a frustrating experience. I
| couldn't make up for a general lack of even high school
| math.
|
| And read any number of books out there on first year
| bschool experiences and you'll find similar.
|
| There are absolutely successful people who are in that
| category. But Math is a major roadblock for many people.
| dctoedt wrote:
| One of the things: "Enter my years of experience with "Problem
| Solving." I am 28 years old, so I put 28."
| maximp wrote:
| I don't know, there were a few years in my early 20s when I
| just avoided problem solving the best I could.
| teddyh wrote:
| So avoiding problem solving is a problem you solved?
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| I've had similar experiences across my career. If you have any
| self-esteem the process is a sad joke. It's amazing how many
| outfits - recruiters and hiring companies - don't realize how
| many yellow and red flags they emit in the most basic of
| interactions.
|
| I have a phrase I like to repeat: How you hire is who you hire.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| > _It 's amazing how many outfits - recruiters and hiring
| companies - don't realize how many yellow and red flags they
| emit in the most basic of interactions._
|
| It's like an reverse "cast a wide net" type of situation, where
| the net is tiny and full of holes, but there are so many
| desperate people out there that they still catch enough
| candidates with it to never question their methods.
| one2three4 wrote:
| "How you hire is who you hire." I like that. Reminds me of "You
| optimize what you measure".
|
| The thing is that they can do it. It's a buyers market - that
| is if you consider sellers the people selling their know-how
| and time for a living.
| trentnix wrote:
| I just went through a job search and had most of the same
| experiences. I even had a recruiter, one that headhunted me,
| recommend an opportunity only to pause and remark that my
| experience as a business owner was a "problem". I couldn't help
| myself but to laugh and ask "then why did you call me to tell me
| how great of a fit I am???"
|
| Add those experiences to daily visits to the bizarre, cargo-cult
| world of virtue signaling, victimhood, and motivational quotes
| that is LinkedIn and you have a recipe for career despair.
| LinkedIn is like Mos Eisley mixed with Initech from Office Space.
|
| I hope I never have to job hunt ever again.
| ahepp wrote:
| >Work as a contractor because the company forgot I said I'd be
| moving and didn't want to file the paperwork in two states. At
| the time, I did not know the school or state of my wife's
| residency.
|
| That seems extremely reasonable to me.
|
| Last time I was looking, there was a lot of bullshit, but I just
| ignored it. There are (and always will be) a lot of stupid,
| difficult people out there. Life will always be miserable if you
| feel obliged to do what they ask.
|
| That said, one that really pissed me off was asking me to record
| a self-interview.
|
| I'm fine doing some quick screens that might help weed out spam
| resumes. But to blatantly say "our time is more valuable than
| yours" is pretty ludicrous given the state of the labor market.
| apozem wrote:
| > That seems extremely reasonable to me.
|
| I actually agreed to do this. I was willing to contract for a a
| few months until we moved. Didn't matter :(
| invisibledev wrote:
| > I accepted a position with a company that had a sane, speedy
| hiring process.
|
| The consultancy can hire quickly because they can immediately
| bill you out. It doesn't mean they're a better/more efficient
| employer or whatever. But I can understand OP's frustration.
| CapitalistCartr wrote:
| I fail "personality tests" because I am, in fact, not average,
| and because I don't care enough to lie on them.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| If you're just average then that raises suspicion, too.
| specialist wrote:
| In a world built on lies, truthsaying is seditious.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| I always feel like I can pick the answers that indicate the
| competitive, Type-A, entrepreneurial types of people that the
| hiring company is looking for. But I'm told the tests are
| actually rigged to detect that. So who knows? I've only had one
| job where something like that was part of the screening
| process.
| ahepp wrote:
| I'm curious if there's anything more advanced to detect lying
| than "you scored too high"
| xyzelement wrote:
| I find that the experience one has recruiting is directly related
| to _where_ that person is interviewing which in turn is related
| to their caliber.
|
| On one extreme, a very desirable dev has the luxury of ignoring
| all but the most thoughtful recruiter pings on LinkedIn. He can
| also tune out companies that are too small, not tech-focused,
| don't have a good reputation, whatever. The small remainder of
| recruiters and companies that he _will_ speak to are much more
| likely to have their shit together and provide a solid recruiting
| experience.
|
| On the other hand, if someone doesn't have a ton of options, they
| end up being much less selective about whom they speak to and
| where they interview, in addition to being less likely to be
| recruited by the top players to begin with.
|
| I think this explains the dichotomy of why some people
| consistently have horrible experiences and some never have them.
| And then there's the "hint" that if you only have the horrible
| experiences, there is something you need to strategically change.
| granshaw wrote:
| Classic "rich get richer" effect, should be a law saying that
| it's as common in society as the normal distribution is in
| nature
| ghaff wrote:
| You're essentially arguing for a bimodal distribution which
| does, in fact, seem to exist to at least some degree in some
| professions, including law.
| xyzelement wrote:
| I am not even saying that. As technologists, we have a TON of
| impact into our own hire ability and incomes. More than
| people realize.
|
| For example, I looked at the blog author's LinkedIn profile.
| Regardless of his level, it's not a good profile in terms of
| presenting his maturity as a technologist and ability to
| deliver outcomes. Which lowers his odds of being noticed by
| good recruiters _even at his current caliber of dev._ To at
| least some degree, this contributes to the negative
| experience he is having.
| jasonladuke0311 wrote:
| I don't know if I'm desirable, but definitely selective. I
| targeted a few dozen roles I found, all of them at companies I
| was interested in. I got replies from a dozen or so, and ended
| up interviewing at 8. All them were very pleasant, even
| interesting in some cases. These were all places that are well-
| known here so maybe there is a correlation?
|
| I don't like the take-home assessment trend, but I do
| understand it from a hiring perspective.
| toast0 wrote:
| > On one extreme, a very desirable dev has the luxury of
| ignoring all but the most thoughtful recruiter pings on
| LinkedIn.
|
| You've set your sights too low. A very desirable dev doesn't
| need to interface with LinkedIn at all.
| ghaff wrote:
| I have responded to a few recruiters over time. But every job
| since the one I was recruited on-campus for in grad school
| came from reaching out to someone I knew at the company. (Not
| a developer but in tech.)
|
| ADDED: I've been in a sufficiently specialized subset of the
| industry for a long time that random recruiter emails aren't
| likely to be interesting. And I know a lot of people at
| different companies. So I have pretty much a bare bones
| profile on LinkedIn as I'm not really looking for inbound
| pings.
| 908B64B197 wrote:
| Even worst: a lot of the best devs out there are completely
| invisible.
|
| They get offers long before they even decide to switch jobs.
| They simply never had a LinkedIn account to begin with. It's
| a friend that calls them to tell them about the new project
| they are about to hire for.
|
| Companies can either spend more on recruiting fees, or more
| on better devs that will try to get their friends hired...
| vitaflo wrote:
| >Companies can either spend more on recruiting fees, or
| more on better devs that will try to get their friends
| hired...
|
| Yup, half of the team I'm on is made up of people who have
| worked together in the past and are good. That's how I got
| the job and how I get all my gigs. I haven't had to really
| interview for a job since 2002. LinkedIn is entirely
| unnecessary when you have a large enough network of people
| who enjoy working with you. The jobs come to you.
| cloudedcordial wrote:
| I purposely put very little info on LinkedIn to look like a
| desirable employee and to avoid clueless people from looking
| for career advice from me.
| worker767424 wrote:
| I keep it up-to-date with at least my employers because there
| are enough FAANGs and well-known unicorns on the list that
| that alone gets me recruiters emails. A few of the FAANGs
| have a recruiter check in with me every year. Basically, I
| interact with it enough so recruiters know I'm out there and
| desirable.
| xyzelement wrote:
| I can see how that could be true although seems silly to
| limit your inbound opportunities that way (my last 2 roles
| came via a LI reach-out so I am biased)
|
| What has been your path that landed you amazing highly paid
| roles and why do you think you're not missing out by not
| hearing from a broader set of companies?
| toast0 wrote:
| Went to a small college in Milwaukee cause I knew someone
| going there on IRC and they had low admission standards.
|
| Got my job at Yahoo Travel via Topcoder referal (before
| LinkedIn existed). Worked there for seven years. Got many
| many many spams from LinkedIn to my yahoo-inc address when
| people uploaded the corporate address book and LinkedIn
| wouldn't let you unsubscribe without making an account.
| Made enough to pay a mortgage on a bay area house with a
| single income.
|
| Got recruited to WhatsApp by Brian Acton who was breifly my
| boss's boss at Yahoo. Worked there for not quite eight
| years. Made enough to retire comfortably.
|
| Could I have been more highly paid? Probably when I was
| working for Yahoo, I got a bigger salary when I moved to a
| startup. I doubt I could have found anything better post
| 2014 though.
|
| If I was looking now, I would probably look at selected
| company's hiring pages and/or through niche sites like HN's
| who's hiring etc.
| xyzelement wrote:
| Excellent story! My strategy is "the more inbound
| opportunity the better" so LI is my friend (with plenty
| of saying "no thank you") but it would be very hard to
| argue that your approach doesn't work well.
| Frazmatazz wrote:
| I'm pretty selective although I'm fairly low caliber. I have
| alternative income so I'm never in a rush to get hired.
|
| I'm sometimes surprised by weird hiring practices at a place I
| didn't expect. Even different positions at the same FAANG can
| be completely different experiences.
| User23 wrote:
| My ideal hiring system has the following properties:
|
| 1) When I am looking for a job, I get to work with people who are
| better than me and who will raise me up to their level.
|
| 2) When I am looking to fill a job, I get to work with people who
| are better than me and who will raise me up to their level.
|
| At a first glance this suggests that my ideal hiring system
| doesn't exist. Thanks to multidimensionality that's not
| necessarily true, but it's not necessarily false either.
| Kluny wrote:
| Thanks to multidimensionality, I'd say it's totally false. You
| can hire someone, or be hired by, someone who will raise your
| level via leadership, emotional skills, salesmanship, writing
| skills, and a million other "soft" things, besides the universe
| of technical skills that exist. I would think you only need
| someone to be better than you at one thing to make them a
| worthwhile hire or coworker.
| one2three4 wrote:
| I feel for him but honestly what he's been through is small
| potatoes. Been looking in earnest for 1 month now. I've done
| about 10 take-homes, 20 codility-style, a couple personality and
| IQ ones, numerous screens...
|
| Yes. Hiring is totally broken. And/or there is an glut of devs
| out there to the point where landing a decent offer is really
| hard if you're going the traditional way (i.e. not having someone
| from inside rooting for you).
|
| My job market is EU.
| skeletal88 wrote:
| Where in the EU? Where would you be willing to move to? What
| role would you like to have?
| throwaway743 wrote:
| I've been looking since the end of October, since getting laid
| off. Had quite a lot of interviews, passed the majority of
| technicals given, etc, but did not receive any offers. At the
| end of January I said fuck it and am now in the process of
| building the foundation for my small business. The job hunting
| process is incredibly disheartening and stressful, and I'd
| rather put that energy to use rather than waste.
|
| US/NY market here
| ipnon wrote:
| I've come to the same conclusion, that it's easier and more
| profitable to create and sell your own application than to do
| the hiring song and dance, especially in the long term.
| weird-eye-issue wrote:
| Good luck if you think it is easier!
| one2three4 wrote:
| Best of luck with your endeavor.
| goatinaboat wrote:
| If you have not done so already buy a copy of Cracking The
| Coding Interview and take a few weeks off applying anywhere to
| work your way through it. Most modern interviews are tests of
| how recently you have read this one book. Good luck!
| one2three4 wrote:
| That's not much of a problem. At least not for me. I pass
| most of these interviews. But still... Anyway. It's probably
| too early to get to conclusions but I just wanted to
| highlight that it has been abnormally hard, long and at times
| surreal up to now.
| hartator wrote:
| > Anyway, hiring is broken, we all know it.
|
| I don't get why people says X is broken. When processes work
| exactly as designed. It's just shitty processes.
| f6v wrote:
| What Klarna does is immediately send you some sort of IQ test
| after you apply. Needless to say, I failed miserably. At least
| now I know that I'm cognitively challenged.
| one2three4 wrote:
| Nope. That's a skill as well. Practice a bit and you'll be
| flying through them.
| jasonladuke0311 wrote:
| They never responded to my application so I'm even dumber than
| that
| imwillofficial wrote:
| Every "personality quiz" I took for the military I "popped" on
| and had to talk to a psych doc. After the third time, having no
| history of killing animals as a child or other aberrant behavior,
| I asked the doc, "why am I here?"
|
| "Your answers were too normal, indicating you're hiding
| something"
|
| Can't win with these guys hahahaha
| Jugurtha wrote:
| I remember an exam in our probability class. Bayes, and all.
| The problem gave the probability of hitting a rabbit, but asked
| to compute the probability of killing the rabbit given certain
| premises.
|
| I answered that there was no way to know, given that hitting
| the animal and killing the animal were not the same thing.
| Semantics matter. One of the professors was really into that
| debate (during the exam) and said I was right. The other said
| "What are you talking about... It's a rabbit". I asked what if
| I hit the rabbit in its tail or foot. He said "It's a rabbit",
| then curved his hand to mime a rabbit's foot, and said "if you
| hit the rabbit here, he'll die". I said what's the probability
| of the rabbit dying given you hit the foot?
|
| The other professor taunted him saying I was technically right.
|
| Anyway... I wrote that, for the exam, we'll consider that any
| hit is considered lethal, then proceeded to answer the
| question.
| goatinaboat wrote:
| _what 's the probability of the rabbit dying given you hit
| the foot?_
|
| A rabbit who can't run is easy prey for a fox or a buzzard
| so... pretty high?
| Jugurtha wrote:
| That came up in the "debate" when I was explaining my
| position :-D
| pavel_lishin wrote:
| The probability of any rabbit dying is 100%, eventually.
| toast0 wrote:
| The probability of a rabbit dying is 1. Can't change that.
|
| Depends which foot then, I suppose. Probably a rabbit
| missing a rear foot is going to have a real hard time
| getting around, but one missing a front foot may be better
| able to adapt. We'll probably need to do a study to know
| for sure.
| goatinaboat wrote:
| _The probability of a rabbit dying is 1. Can 't change
| that._
|
| Right, I mean as a direct result of your hit, not in old
| age of myxomatosis, having had many baby bunnies
|
| To avenge him
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-10 23:01 UTC)