TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The Technical Interview Is Dead

165 点作者 victorhn将近 12 年前

22 条评论

tptacek将近 12 年前
The technical interview is overwhelmingly the primary screening method of choice at the world&#x27;s most competent software development companies. The team that builds the match engine for the electronic exchange, the team that builds the boot ROM for your smart phone, the team that builds the Google crawler and indexing, the teams building kernel SAN storage code --- these teams are hired by technical interviews.<p>The &quot;audition project&quot; is a trend story with, from what I can see, very little empirical evidence to back it up. When the most notable example of a company routinely employing audition is Treehouse --- all due respect to Treehouse, but still --- that&#x27;s a red flag.<p>The bigger red flag is that the paid audition project method has obvious flaws. The top 20% of software developers are almost uniformly employed. Prospective new employers for these people court them actively; in fact, the problem of companies luring top developers out of other companies is so challenging that large SFBA tech companies have entered into illegal compacts to stifle the practice. Companies are so hard-up for talent that they&#x27;ll &quot;buy&quot; startups just to get access to their teams.<p>In this environment, why would a top developer, who has their choice among tens of different high-paying interesting jobs, <i>moonlight</i> for a prospective new employer just so they can make sure the relationship&#x27;s going to work?<p>Most technical interviews are terribly flawed. They aren&#x27;t standardized and they aren&#x27;t rigorous so you can&#x27;t compare candidates on any apples-apples basis and you can&#x27;t correlate them to job performance to make them more predictive. Most of the developers tasked with conducting them suck at interviewing; many use interviews as a sort of hazing ritual, and most use them as opportunity to project their own subjective views about how software should be built onto candidates. Many technical interviews are trivia games punctuated by awkward attempts at working through code on a whiteboard or a piece of paper in a high-pressure environment.<p>The solution to this problem is to improve technical interviews. It&#x27;s not to pretend that the whole market for devs has suddenly embraced temp- to- perm hiring. It hasn&#x27;t. It&#x27;s getting <i>harder</i> to find good developers, not easier, and the notion that companies have the luxury of inflicting &quot;audition projects&quot; on candidates is counter to reality.
评论 #5924583 未加载
评论 #5925150 未加载
评论 #5924307 未加载
评论 #5924617 未加载
评论 #5924649 未加载
评论 #5925839 未加载
评论 #5924800 未加载
评论 #5924345 未加载
评论 #5924520 未加载
评论 #5926238 未加载
评论 #5924373 未加载
评论 #5924526 未加载
评论 #5925139 未加载
评论 #5925259 未加载
评论 #5924319 未加载
评论 #5924835 未加载
评论 #5924627 未加载
评论 #5924533 未加载
JamesVI将近 12 年前
Variations on the theme of &quot;have them do a paid project for you&quot; surface here every so often. The problem is that a large number of job seekers currently have a job (everyone keeps telling them it is easier to get a job while you have a job). Even qualified, competent programmers will find it hard to accept the risk of being dropped at the conclusion of the short project (and if you no-one ever gets dropped, what is the point of the project besides giving you a warm and fuzzy?)<p>Fact is, you have to do everything up to that &#x27;mini project&#x27; then just go with your gut and hire&#x2F;no hire. If they underperform in the role you need to either change the role, try and train them up or let them go.<p>This trial period is just a way of pushing the risk of a bad hiring decision back onto the candidate and allowing the manager to avoid the discomfort of actually firing someone (although telling the candidate that the project didn&#x27;t work out is functionally the same thing).
评论 #5924174 未加载
评论 #5924246 未加载
评论 #5924275 未加载
评论 #5924249 未加载
balloot将近 12 年前
I don&#x27;t know what it is about technical interview-style code puzzles, but I have always been terrible at them. Every time I go through a job hunt, I end up with at least one fabulous flameout where I just can&#x27;t do something that would normally be very simple for me. It sucks. I have fantastic experience, good references, a degree from a top university, but you put me in a room with someone looking over my shoulder as I write code and I just turn into mush often enough that it makes passing a many round technical interview a statistical improbability.<p>The good news is that more and more companies (and especially the small ones that I like to work for) do the coding sample&#x2F;test code thing. And every time I get one of those I absolutely crush it. I&#x27;ve never once been denied an offer when asked to write an offline code sample - and the offers have been from a number of the top startups in the game.<p>What does any of this mean? Well, in the last two companies I worked with I ended up rising to be the top technical person on my team. I&#x27;ve never had any kind of negative review of any sort. And in the last round this happened after I was denied an offer from two different companies because I couldn&#x27;t code.<p>So I guess I&#x27;m that guy. I&#x27;ve been rejected from Google 3 different times because they keep begging me to interview based off my experience&#x2F;internal recommendations, and then I interview and their interview&#x2F;hazing process weeds me out. It would be nice if they woke up and realized that process isn&#x27;t an effective filter, but I&#x27;m not holding my breath. In the meantime there&#x27;s plenty of companies who will happily hire me after they see me do work that&#x27;s actually relevant to the job. And when I interview people for my team I steer clear of trying to stump them under intense pressure, and instead ask for a mini project. I guess it doesn&#x27;t feed the ego quite like breaking someone with a super awesome whiteboard question, but screening candidates more effectively makes up for that.
评论 #5932423 未加载
benjamincburns将近 12 年前
This annoys me. Articles like this co-opt a term (technical interviews) and redefine it against a subset of things that qualify as being that term (brainteaser&#x2F;quiz heavy technical interviews).<p>There is simply no way to reliably hire skilled people without at least attempting to assess their skills. For technical people this means technical interviews. And an interview process that includes a trial project... is <i>still</i> a technical interview.<p>This is distracting from the real issue. Most companies are really bad at scaling their interview policies&#x2F;processes. Quiz&#x2F;Brainteaser interviews are born from an effort to standardize evaluations across multiple interviewers and multiple candidates. So rather than focusing on developing an interview process that&#x27;s focused on finding people that are a good fit, you&#x27;re focusing on developing an interview process that&#x27;s first easy for anyone on your side of the table to execute. Structure and process are good when they benefit the prior case, and stifling when they benefit the latter. In the end you wind up with a very expensive and completely repeatable noise generator that&#x27;s of no benefit to anyone.
ig1将近 12 年前
Giving someone a real project to do which they get paid for is a really bad idea. If the person is working for another company at the time then they likely have something their contract that specifically stops them doing work for someone else while still under employment. It&#x27;s ground for a lawsuit against the employee.<p>It also means that as the interviewing company that you don&#x27;t legally own the IP rights for the code you just put into production, which opens you up to a lawsuit as well.<p>And that&#x27;s just for when you&#x27;re hiring someone from another random company, if you&#x27;re hiring someone from a competitor you&#x27;ve got a whole different layer of complexity in terms of NDA, non-compete, etc. violations.<p>And then you get into employment law and accounting complications. Who&#x27;s declaring tax on the payment ? - if the candidate isn&#x27;t setup for contracting work they&#x27;ll need to do a bunch of work to sort out the taxes, if the company takes care of taxes than that might be taken as evidence of employment.<p>It&#x27;s one of those ideas that might seem nice superficially but which will get you into a world of pain in the long term.
评论 #5924517 未加载
k8si将近 12 年前
I haven&#x27;t started applying for jobs yet (I&#x27;m still in undergrad) but I know for a fact that I would choke on those &quot;brain teaser&quot; questions, turn bright red and everything. Admittedly, there&#x27;s just too much pressure (I hate looking stupid, especially in front of strangers, especially in front of male strangers--don&#x27;t we all though?).<p>However, I&#x27;m pretty sure that I CAN do the following (even under pressure): Work through a problem rationally, work constructively with others, pay attention to detail without losing sight of the big picture, write code. And I would much rather focus on side projects than studying variations on Towers of Hanoi.<p>So this whole interviewing trend makes me want to cry out of relief.
评论 #5924759 未加载
评论 #5925532 未加载
sp_将近 12 年前
Paid moonlighting projects are illegal for all us work visa holders but sometimes we wanna change jobs too. :(
pandaman将近 12 年前
I think this person misses the point of technical interview. Technical interview is to assert the candidate actually has the skills and experience claimed in the resume.<p>When somebody is saying he or she has 20 years of C++ experience and 150 projects shipped yet he or she does not know what is virtual function - this means he or she lied on the resume. If you had not conducted a technical interview - you&#x27;d learned about this much later, at much greater cost. Chances are that somebody who lies on the resume is also good at BSing about &quot;past projects&quot; and &quot;greatest achievements&quot;.<p>FizzBuzz or a general screen test won&#x27;t help because people have different skills. If you are hiring somebody who writes Perl it&#x27;s stupid to ask about C++ and vice versa.<p>Writing a test project - probably the best way to hire recent graduates. Probably the worst way to hire somebody who already has a job and you are desperate to poach, not really good at picking people who have several offers to choose from either.
评论 #5924762 未加载
EliRivers将近 12 年前
Whilst I&#x27;d love to have them do a paid project for me that will actually ship, I work in a part of the programming world where a project easily runs a decade from first draft of requirements to entering maintenance. This sort of suggestion always seems to come from the world of web apps or SaaS or whatever else is hip at the moment.<p>I also can&#x27;t imagine what HR would say if I told them I wanted to hire someone for a week just to see how they get on. &quot;Well, then your HR system is broken and you should totally hack it to make it better.&quot; I&#x27;ll get right on that, just as soon as I become Vice-President of HR. They&#x27;d tell me to do my job and hire people who can do what they&#x27;re hired for.<p>Where this is going is the ripost that this kind of suggestion always comes from the small part of the industry where it might be practical; the are are a great many programming jobs in companies where it really, really isn&#x27;t.
评论 #5925204 未加载
评论 #5924271 未加载
jacques_chester将近 12 年前
I see that hyperbolic headlines are going strong, however.
评论 #5924357 未加载
incision将近 12 年前
I interviewed with one of the big Internet companies not too long ago and found the process pretty refreshing and quite unlike what I&#x27;d so often read about.<p>It opened up with a sort of multi-faceted FizzBuzz followed by long &quot;behavioral&quot; discussion like one of the references refers to [0].<p>The audition process doesn&#x27;t make any sense to me. It&#x27;s essentially a short duration temp-to-hire. Great people tend to be employed or at least not idle, unemployed people are looking for jobs, not 1 week gigs.<p>0: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;06&#x2F;20&#x2F;business&#x2F;in-head-hunting-big-data-may-not-be-such-a-big-deal.html?_r=0" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;06&#x2F;20&#x2F;business&#x2F;in-head-hunting-b...</a>
brenfrow将近 12 年前
I think whats always been hard for me is dealing with the problem I&#x27;m trying to solve and all the anxiety happening at the same time. I feel totally comfortable writing code, but when 80% of brain is dedicated to flight-or-fight response it makes it extremely hard to answer technical questions and pass the interview.<p>My favorite interview that I took part in and got hired was when I was given 2 hours to pair program a project with the interviewer. So I really like the concepts in this post. Anything to get the developer to calm down and feel at home.
eliben将近 12 年前
Two common kinds of reactions by people who fail tech interviews at Google, Facebook, etc:<p>1. Think how to improve and practice for the next interview.<p>2. Bitch about how technical interviews are unfair, biased, miss the best people and ... OMG - DEAD!!!
评论 #5925762 未加载
mahyarm将近 12 年前
What is so bloody hard about just putting a laptop in front of someone, ask them to do a bunch of basic but real programming tasks, including internet access and see what happens? The overall jist I get out of people have been pretty accurate the months and years I have worked with them.<p>I dropped the ball on one employer because the audition project took too long.
评论 #5926026 未加载
krob将近 12 年前
I&#x27;ve done interviews before. I think that there are still many older people, and young people who do not have accounts on sites like github, they have nothing to show. But may be reasonable candidates to hire because of their technical talent. I think it&#x27;s appropriate to ask questions to an interviewee based on the domain knowledge you&#x27;d expect them to have during an interview. These involve little things that are very typical of day-to-day work. These are the type of things I&#x27;d ask over the phone or email. Once you determine they are not blowing smoke up your rear, ask them to come in for a more formal person-to-person interview.<p>I then ask them a fairly broad open-ended set of questions to see how they describe the process of solving said problem.<p>This usually involves talking about tools, their process, their libraries of choice(something more generic here for other fields) and generally helps to assess their personable skills.<p>If I like them, I will ask them if they have any personal projects they want to share or something they are enthusiastic about in their domain of knowledge.<p>I think the biggest thing is that a lot of companies doing technical interviewing only reserve a small period of time to determine their new candidate. For people long in the industry, their resume should speak for itself. For younger people, it&#x27;s kind of like, would you sleep with a woman you just met? How does that experience usually turn out? It&#x27;s a 50&#x2F;50 or worse chance you end up with a nightmare. Spend some time to interview your candidates, or end up with the one-night-stand.
nether将近 12 年前
This is funny because they&#x27;ve adopted the same interviewing style that large bureaucratic organizations have been using for at least a decade, even for technical positions. I went through a behavioral interview at Boeing, and then another at a large federal agency (engineering job). Technical aptitude is usually clobbered by the inability to work with people.
freework将近 12 年前
This article doesn&#x27;t mention the best interview method of them all: the presentation interview. Have the interviewee prepare a 15 minute presentation of a technical topic of the interviewee&#x27;s choice. At the end of that presentation the team should have a general idea of the person&#x27;s thinking speed&#x2F;experience&#x2F;communications skills. Basically all you&#x27;d ever need to know about the person.<p>In my version of a perfect world, each company would have a &quot;speaking hour&quot; designated once per week. Each speaking hour would feature two or three speakers, each with 15 minutes to speak about something interesting they&#x27;ve worked on. The idea being if you wanted to work for a company, you&#x27;d apply to speak at their next &quot;speaking hour&quot;. If you show up and give your talk and the audience approves your talk, then its understood you&#x27;re hired.
kenster07将近 12 年前
I like the idea of using the interview as a screening process, just to make sure the candidate didn&#x27;t lie on their resume, and that they are a socially competent person who can survive in a team environment, or better yet, improve the team.<p>But, you should also carefully examine the past code that the candidate has written (that he can legally disclose) and also design a programming test for candidates to complete.
agsamek将近 12 年前
One good observation from the article is that more simple questions is better than a few harder ones. Not much besides this.<p>My observation is that recruitment is only one part of the problem. The other part is that companies do very poor job at assessing skills during employment and loose&#x2F;fire randomly. This seems to be much more important problem for top companies leading to slow degradation of skills over time.
lowglow将近 12 年前
We talk a little about how each one of us at Techendo does our hiring. It might offer a bit of insight on what works and what doesn&#x27;t. <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=xHunZeWOrjc" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=xHunZeWOrjc</a>
评论 #5924822 未加载
biot将近 12 年前
Reword the title as &quot;Is the technical interview dead?&quot; and you have your answer: it&#x27;s always &quot;No&quot;.
dschiptsov将近 12 年前
So, finally, &quot;show us your code&#x2F;poetry&#x2F;papers&quot; won?)