Read on Twitter
a variety of interview options is helpful because it will help you find candidates who are awesome in/comfy in a variety of situations.
too many folks act like they are there to HODOR HODOR HODOR against the raging mob, not to find as many fucking awesome people as they can. https://twitter.com/bookwar_info/status/1361287354498109440
too many folks act like they are there to HODOR HODOR HODOR against the raging mob, not to find as many fucking awesome people as they can. https://twitter.com/bookwar_info/status/1361287354498109440
it's not that there is *nothing* to the idea of a bar. it's just that our industry is currently running waaaayyyy to one side of the slider.
i mean, if you only wanted to make interviewees walk away feeling good, that's easy -- ask only easy questions and never press or counter.
i mean, if you only wanted to make interviewees walk away feeling good, that's easy -- ask only easy questions and never press or counter.
that's not the goal, though. the goal is to have a stimulating conversation that helps you find the edges of the candidates relevant technical skills, and maybe stretches them a little, while not being adversarial or dwelling on irrelevant skills or minutiae, and sharing control.
the industry currently obsesses over asking questions that feel super hard (often because they dwell on irrelevant skills or minutiae) and thus feed the ego of the current team members who "passed the bar".
don't underestimate how much this can be driven by IC ego, not managers.
don't underestimate how much this can be driven by IC ego, not managers.
if you're paying attention and retro your interviews, you *will* learn which questions correlate with outcomes. but it may surprise you. it's extremely unlikely to be the ones people are clinging to as their precious bar.
it's more likely to be stuff like...self-awareness.
it's more likely to be stuff like...self-awareness.
people do some wacky shit in interviews, man. and then they retconn it to have been meaningful.
when literally any process will produce some great hires and some not-so-great hires. we have to be real careful about assigning causation.
when literally any process will produce some great hires and some not-so-great hires. we have to be real careful about assigning causation.
my bar for a question or process is, "is this better signal than a coin flip?" surprisingly few pass this test.
i dearly wish google or fb would run an experiment where they coin flipped and accepted a % of their applicants post-screen, then compared those outcomes to baseline.
i dearly wish google or fb would run an experiment where they coin flipped and accepted a % of their applicants post-screen, then compared those outcomes to baseline.
i suspect, but cannot prove, that their team diversity would go up and the caliber of candidate / success rate of hires would waver by extremely little -- a very manageable amount, esp paired with the normal 90 day probation.
i also believe that the most impactful work anyone can do to raise the caliber of their applicant pool is,
build a functional engineering team that doesn't fail in the predictable ways. fail in exciting new ways! && share your work. watch experienced engineers flock to join you.
build a functional engineering team that doesn't fail in the predictable ways. fail in exciting new ways! && share your work. watch experienced engineers flock to join you.
there are SO many interesting new ways to fail at engineering orgs, i cannot understand why everyone insists on failing by hiring a monoculture, only recruiting from stanford/MIT, or acting like new hires will be forbidden from googling or learning anything new.
BORED NOW
BORED NOW
i suggest approaching technical interviews as though you and the interviewee are united to discover if you'll be happy and productive on a team together.
you want them to succeed! unless they wouldn't be happy here, in which case you want to help them find that out too!
you want them to succeed! unless they wouldn't be happy here, in which case you want to help them find that out too!
maybe it's a terrible idea, but at least it's *interesting*, and i bet a whole slew of folks would be interested in exploring it with you.
nobody WANTS to get let go for not having the skill set. nobody WANTS to take a job that quickly bores them. see? you want the same things!
nobody WANTS to get let go for not having the skill set. nobody WANTS to take a job that quickly bores them. see? you want the same things!
finally, remember, "we couldn't/didn't hire you" is often said with genuine regret and even heartbreak, and does not by any means imply that you "failed" the freakin interview or should feel bad about yourself. 
see: https://charity.wtf/2019/10/18/the-real-11-reasons-i-dont-hire-you/
see: https://charity.wtf/2019/10/18/the-real-11-reasons-i-dont-hire-you/
gosh it's amazing how many opinions i suddenly, 
urgently sprout every time i need to sit down and respond to unpleasant emails
urgently sprout every time i need to sit down and respond to unpleasant emails
