[vikingcaffiene]

Hiring manager here. IMO the current tech hiring norms are gross and not sustainable. It feels like a weird hazing ritual and with the current market, is the single biggest reason you can't hire. Why on earth would someone burn a weekend on a take-home test for your startup when they have 15 other irons in the fire? At my current employer we got rid of all that ridiculousness. No take home test. No live coding. We've gotten the whole process down to a few hours over a few days. I'd like to think it's a mutually respectful process.

I think it's time we accept that the person we are talking to is who they say they are on their resume. You don't see accountants balancing books before they get hired. Why should this be any different? If you aren't who you say you are, its either blatantly obvious in the interview or we'll find out when you join and we'll try to correct or part ways. This is like pretty much any other job out there.

[kube-system]

> You don't see accountants balancing books before they get hired.

You sure do, and not just by a hiring manager's whim, but by law. Accountants have occupational licensing.

> I think it's time we accept that the person we are talking to is who they say they are on their resume.

This is a straw man, I have never "caught a liar" on an a coding exam. What they are helpful for doing is judging the quality of what it means to be "proficient in [x]".

If there's anything I have learned from giving coding exams to candidates, it's that the ability of a candidate to verbally sell themselves in an interview has a weak correlation to their ability to produce quality work.

[vikingcaffiene]

> Accountants have occupational licensing.

Forgive my ignorance, but is this during every interview? If I am reading this right this is a certification they'd need to get which would be on their resume. Do they need to re-prove those skills every time?

[anderber]

This sounds very forward thinking and I like it. Would you be willing to share a bit more on the process? What does it entail? In the past I was hired on just 2 interviews, and all we did was talk as peers. It felt comfortable and honest. It's the reason I said yes to switching positions.

[vikingcaffiene]

Thanks! So, I'll say that we are still tweaking and trying to get things just right but, as of the time of me writing this, here is the process:

- HR call 30 min.

- Talk to hiring manager (me) 30 min. Get to know each other and feel out if there is a mutual fit.

- Technical panel 1hr. Speak with several engineers on the team who share your discipline (front end or back end for example). Again no live coding. We just talk through stuff.

- Talk to the team PM. 30 min. Get a sense of how you collaborate with our product team partners to build new features in our application.

After that it's the usual comp negotiations, background, and reference checks. Assuming all that works out then hired!

We're hiring so, if anyone is interested in finding out more, contact info is in my bio.

[justinlloyd]

We don't do take home, leetcode, live coding either. We walk through past projects and ask very pointed questions. We ask about difficult problems we've faced in the past and how you might solve it. I role play a junior programmer describing a situation I have and then ask junior programmer level questions of how to solve the problem. You get to talk to two very senior software developers, and two very senior engineers in other roles, and the CEO (who is also highly technical).

Once you get past the first screening call, I find you on social media, blogs, forums and read your posts, and see what questions you're asking on stackoverflow. Then we might move you to the next stage. All in all, you get a pre-screening from our recruiter (about 15 to 30 minutes), a screening call from a technical hiring manager (30 minutes), and then you talk three or four principal engineers (45 minutes each). This happens in days.

The only person that doesn't talk to you that is highly technical will be the recruiter. If you're hired and start work, we watch what you're doing, mentor as necessary. If you have the right attitude and are coachable, so long as you can string together coherent lines of code then everything else can be taught.

[ihateolives]

> Once you get past the first screening call, I find you on social media, blogs, forums and read your posts, and see what questions you're asking on stackoverflow.

And what if my social media presence is minimal or not public?

[vikingcaffiene]

This is the right way to go. If I were looking for a job right now I'd be hitting you up. I've said as much in a few other threads but it's not only the right thing to do, its a competitive advantage.

[nnt38]

So you screen out everyone who cares about their online privacy?

[bobabob]

> I think it's time we accept that the person we are talking to is who they say they are on their resume.

Yea because we live in a place where everyone is super honest and no one is going to try and take advantage of that to make 500k a year.

IMO, it doesn't work. Talk is cheap.

I wouldn't have a job if I had to talk my way into any company, I'm an introvert, I suck at communicating orally. But I can solve problems and write really good code. You throw problems at me during an interview and I'll solve them. Ultimately your company's code is not going to write itself.

[daenz]

>Yea because we live in a place where everyone is super honest and no one is going to try and take advantage of that to make 500k a year.

I would be THRILLED if I was put into some kind of a short probationary period, with limited access (and potentially restricted salary, with retroactive reimbursement) while I showed what I was worth. I personally have a hard time demonstrating that in short interviews, and it's only once I come in contact with the shape of the company's problems do I show my value. Imo it would lower the stress and paranoia on both sides over a candidate's fit.

[vikingcaffiene]

> Yea because we live in a place where everyone is super honest and no one is going to try and take advantage of that to make 500k a year.

You are right that there is more risk with this approach. I honestly think that its a better, more humane way to do things though. Anecdotally, I've hired a couple _really_ solid developers via this methodology. At least in my case, it's been working out well. As always, you try stuff and iterate.

> I'm an introvert, I suck at communicating orally.

I get it. So am I. Its actually very hard for me to reply to these comments b/c of my general aversion to putting myself out there! I don't think there's a one size fits all solution. At my company at least, being able to communicate effectively both orally and written, is important. We do a lot of pairing and documentation etc. Thats not for everyone. YMMV.

[Oras]

Writing code is not everything. You're going to work with a team, deal with managers, go to meetings, discuss and brainstorm ideas.

Lack of communication skills is a bug not a feature.

[ergocoder]

Interviews for other occupations are way way worse.

[brian-armstrong]

Going through a few days of grueling interviews every few years is vastly preferable to spending a few years working alongside people who can't pull their own weight. Hiring managers are timid about letting people go and it can take an extraordinary amount of time to part ways with unproductive people.

[vikingcaffiene]

> Hiring managers are timid about letting people go and it can take an extraordinary amount of time to part ways with unproductive people.

With respect, it sounds like you had a bad manager. Underperforming teammates are your managers responsibility. They should be working to address that issue with said teammate or part ways. Sucks. Not fun. It's the job though.