Slashdot Mirror
Measuring LAMP Competency?
An anonymous reader writes "Our company is getting ready to hire a number of programmers. While the majority of the prospective candidates do have good-looking resumes, we are looking to see if we can get some clear metrics in the assessment process. After a little research we have learned that there is a well-established PHP + MySQL training and certification process, and some of the candidates are already certified. There is also a candidate with a good portfolio, a lot of experience, and no certification. Most of the applicants also have some college/university science-related education. So our goal is to be able to somehow measure LAMP overall competency as well as basic computer science concepts such as BNF, data normalization, OOP, MVC, etc. How do Slashdot readers go about this kind of characterization?"
If they can't talk intelligently about what they say they've done... next!
Free as in "the Truth shall set you..."
Personally I have no faith in certifications at all. I know tons of people who are certified out the yazoo and can't do a darn thing. I also knows tons of people with no certifications especially in open source where lots of us were working long before there were certifications, that figure things out on their own and dig for information. The people that are driven to dig are the ones that rock the house. Needing a course to learn is some what of an automatic fail to me. You will learn far more about which type of person they are in the interview than you will from a certification.
The answer seems simple. Ask for guest access to a server that they configured. If they don't have something like that you could set up a simple lamp server and have them perform some basic tasks.
This may be good for interviewing people for a sysadmin position, but I fail to see how configuring a server has anything to do with the applicants ability to develop software.
Why BNF?
there is no higher proof of competency and ability than proof of prior work. certificates are like school courses. everybody can take one if one attends the courses, or passes an exam. practicing in the field however, is an entirely different matter.
portfolio shows that you not only know your field, but also you have properly and responsibly participated in projects, collaborated, and actually built stuff with it, and saw them to their completion.
that is the kind of people you want to hire. and nothing than a portfolio shows it better.
Read radical news here
You need to actually be testing their ability to write software. As a few others have pointed out, having them develop a simple web application as part of the interview process is probably going to be the best way to measure that ability.
Additionally, to test their integration skills, you could also have them attempt to develop a new page to be integrated into your company's product. Not only will this show off their software development skills, but will also give you some insight into their ability to inherit an existing software project and work with it (something that he vast majority of newly-hired developers will have to do).
First you define what you want:
Do you want technical certs? Then look for people with those.
Do you want people with academic background (data normalization, OOP, etc)? Then look for people with CS degree.
Do you want people with experience? Then look for people with relevant experience, and or do a practical test as suggested (which everyone can get their smart friend to do for them I'm sure)
Weight each one of the factors according to what he or she is supposed to be doing.
Systems analyst? Architecture design? Jr. code monkey? Overall hacker (jack of all trades, master of none)?
Then rank them in each factor. Most of those factores are qualitative more than quantitative by the way.
But sometimes, the best programmers are not the ones with the best qualifications, but the ones with the best fit into your business. 8 years php experience vs 4 years php experience IN YOUR INDUSTRY: I'll pick the 4 year experience guy.
please excuse my apathy
As someone who has run a dedicated server for seven years, I would never grant any unknown third party access to my server. Even as a guest with almost no permissions. That's just inviting trouble into your house. Give them code samples, answer questions, provide references, but keep the digital doors locked unless you don't value the data on the machine.
Skip the alphabet soup. Do you really have no one on staff capable of recognizing competence?
If you don't, who were you planning to have manage the new hires? Who were you planning to have interpret your metrics?
As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
While hiring people on a temporary basis sounds like a good idea, it has some serious flaws. Hiring 3 temporary employees with the plan to axe 2 makes for a very stressful/hostile work environment. Only those potential employees with no other job opportunities/offers would even consider it (which is most likely the worst applicants). The list of bad aspects of this idea is longer.
A good work ethic and honesty ...
is not hiring two persons to drop them few months later.
Not to mention it's going to be tough finding someone willing to give up two months of their lives just for a working interview with no guarantee of further employment. Better be ready to pay consultant-level fees to those guys for those two months.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
If they are told up front their position is temporary, what's the problem?
I've hired a couple programmers in the past and there is always one question I ask that I have found sorts out some of the better candidates. The question - "I've just requested you to do some task and you find you really haven't worked out that type of task in the past and aren't fully sure the best approach. What do you do?" The answer I'm looking for is basically they'll let me know that's a new area for them, but that they'll go out and find examples of that type of task and research it and find out how to make it happen. If they say anything along the lines of having me help them, or ask to go to a class, or anything along that line it will automatically set up red flags. And of course, just answering the question "correctly" doesn't automatically mean they are good at doing that, but you can dig deeper into how they'd research it, etc. I've been a programmer for over 25 years now and while there are certain core things that a computer can do and some it can't, the actual processing of it is what matters and it's nearly impossible for you to remember every little detail of every language and system, the real power is in knowing where to look to quickly get your answer. And as a final important talent, a person needs to be good at understanding and conversing specifications from someone that is not technical. Just my thoughts on what I've looked for....
as well as basic computer science concepts such as BNF, data normalization, OOP, MVC, etc.
Put 10 seasoned programmers in a room and, without access to references or preparation, ask them to write the BNF for some subset of a well-known language, normalise a database in stages up to 5th normal form, give a detailed description of OOP implementation in any language (not just "how is inheritance formed?" but "demonstrate polymorphic behaviour - suggest how it might have been implemented - describe its disadvantages" etc.) and ask them to fit some app description into MVC pattern.
You know what? Zero of them will succeed in all of your tasks. And, dear reader, if you claim that you will then you are lying.
You know why? Because testing like this doesn't reveal anything. I passed University with top grades throughout because I knew how to bone up for an exam and cough up the syllabus as requested, as well as having a moderately mathematical head. I can demonstrate prior performance and I can grasp new concepts. I can remind myself quickly of old concepts when given access to a reference.
But I don't have some magical savant-level ability to memorise everything I've ever done (and, experiments on savants suggest, if I did then I'd lack the skills to apply my elephantine knowledge to solving general commercial development problems). It's never hindered me. This sort of ability might be necessary if I were, say, a field intelligence agent(?), and not being able to concoct the right deception within a subsecond time interval might result in my death. Otherwise, it's just a dog and pony show.
They may need those buzzwords or certificates to get past HR... don't be too harsh unless they really believe in those buzzwords!
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
In the past, I've asked people to send me sample code. Some was protected by various agreements, so they sent me snippets that were enough for me to review their coding style, without giving away the details of their work.
The clincher is always the interview. I don't just sit down and talk with someone about what they know, and let them brag without anything supporting it. Ask real world questions. Have them write a few lines of code to do something on a piece of paper or whiteboard. It doesn't have to be syntactically perfect, but it has to be close.
My interviews were more for sysadmin stuff, so having them describe what they'd do for a task can be very revealing. Like a question like this:
"The COO has come to you, because no one else is available. The CEO is flipping out. There's a server on the network running some common variety of Linux. Transfer rates from it to any other machine are very slow, regardless of the protocol. i.e., http, ftp, rsync, samba are all slow. What do you do?"
I'll have established what the real fault is in my head, and give them appropriate answers to what they say to do.
It's a pretty simple one to solve, or at least bring to a point where authorized assistance is needed. I've gotten all kinds of answers to that one. Some answer "call someone else for assistance", which I tell them the someone else is unavailable. Some just reboot it, which isn't a valid answer as a first step. I tell them "No, it's a production machine. You can't." Some actually start pinging, checking ifconfig for errors on the interface, and check the interface duplex. Obviously, the last set of answers is the right one.
Adding extra stress is always useful, if they don't get it right off. A little yelling and table pounding is enough for that. "The COO is demanding an answer now! [pounding on table] We're losing money! If you don't get this fixed, it's your job on the line!" Some people do fine. Some just stare at you dumbfounded without a clue if they don't have Google in front of them.
When it's my interview, and my decision (it's not always both), I evaluate how good the answers were, even if they were wrong. Did the guy show a competent level of knowledge, or does he just think he can do the job and has no clue. A few will float to the top, and quite a few get put to the bottom of the list.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
A lack of ability to properly configure a server can often lead to developers writing code that requires more than the minimum privilege level, wonky configuration "needs" without really thinking it through, and a mindset of "throw hardware at it!" Working previously as a system admin at a web hosting company, the new hires that came to us, usually with a lack of college education or experience with compiled languages but a lot of experience as "web developers", they answers usually involved excessive needs for additional memory. A lot of the resource abuse issues I had to deal with also boiled down to a customer installing a software package that had a lot of neat features but required dedicated hardware to run far in excess of what a shared hosting package or even a VPS could deliver without affecting quality of service for other customers.
I'll freely admit I'm not a good web developer, but I can hold my own reasonably well with Perl and C in the areas I work in then and now. My first instinct, however, is exactly the opposite of "buy more RAM" or "just let everything in through the firewall." Not saying all, or even most, developers are like that. But a very high percentage of the ones I've seen in action are.
What's the problem? Because a good programmer can find a perm position elsewhere. Unless, of course, you offer is heads and shoulders above anything else, all you're going to get from temp positions are the dregs.
That is, no offense, a dumb outlook to have.
A person who doesn't know shit won't learn enough to do the job you want by getting a certificate, true. You should not take possession of a cert as evidence that a person is qualified to do a job without further investigation, also true.
However, a person who mostly knows how to do the job you want will usually learn a little something by getting the relevant cert -- if only a basic understanding of the pieces of the technology or framework in question that haven't yet been relevant to the work they've done with it. They might learn about easier or cleaner ways to solve problems that they already can deal with in a less efficient way. They might learn about some unintended or hidden consequences of an approach they usually take to a problem. These are the kinds of things a person with genuine experience with a technology will pick up in the process of prepping for a cert exam.
Often employers will also pay for their employees to become certified and/or provide other incentives. If that's not you or your employer, sorry, but don't hate on other developers for having had jobs that were actually willing to put money on the line for their employees to keep up with evolving technology.
I happen to love doing contract to hire work - I get paid, you get work performed.
If I like the company (and they offer, so far they have), I'll go perm. If not, thank you and I'm on my way :)
The FTE gig is the worst gig ever. Crap wages, crap work, too many hours, and you get laid off with the same notice as a contractor (but are expected to slave 'for the good of the company'). It's no wonder so many places outsource these days.
An operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
I was with you until the yelling part, an interview is a two way street. If I'm getting yelled at in an interview I can only imagine how bad it will be in the workplace.
On second thought, if that's actually how your office functions, then I guess it is honest and appropriate. I just wouldn't want to work there.
If you started yelling at me in an interview, I would walk out. No one who is competent is going to put up with behavior like that. Enjoy your crappy candidates.
Agreed. Meeting a table thumping, yelling person in the interview would just cause me to stand up and say "I'm sorry, I'm looking for a position at a professional organisation". If this sort of situation is routine enough to require somebody to do well in it during an interview then I'd say there are some problems there.
In real situations this doesn't happen. At least in the places I've worked. There was an incident of massive negligence by the support team involving one of our biggest customers databases last year. Instead of someone in management hitting the table and yelling, everyone in the development team already knew it needed to be fixed and so we fixed it. A good team doesn't need yelling at.
It seems to me that the type of managers who yell and ask why are usually the ones in the positions who don't need to know. A good manager will be right there with the team putting forward ideas, not simply asking questions. If they're not going to be putting in ideas then they should get away from the problem and let people get on with it.
Go home and shave your giant head of smell with your bad self
There is also a candidate with a good portfolio, a lot of experience, and no certification.
I don't know this guy but I'm sure he's extremely well qualified for the job and you should hire him ASAP because he's about to miss another mortgage payment.
but some people go out and get the certification so they can get past the HR droid
Yes, this is a massive problem. In order to get to the face-to-face you have to go through the screening process. This is normally carried out either by the HR trainee or, worse, by a recruitment "consultant". All they've been given is a tick-box of "must-haves" (i.e. a wish list of tangible qualities) and told to go through a pile of CVs.
All they'll do is toss the ones which don't meet the criteria.So you can be the best LAMP-er in the world, but unless you have the random qualification that someone though might be useful you don't even get a chance. So while certification bears no correlation to usefulness in the real world, it's a necessary stamp on your CV to get you through the door.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
As others have said, if you yell at me during the interview, I'm not taking the job. If you thump the table during the interview, I'm not taking the job. I find hypothetical questions very hard to diagnose. I had an interview once where they asked me how to solve a problem that I had solved just the week before on the job I had at the time. It took me longer to remember how I diagnosed and resolved the problem than it had taken me to do it.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
But hey, if you can't handle an environment with occasional high stress, I wouldn't want you there.
You seem to be confusing refusal to accept unprofessional behaviour by idiot management with an inability to handle high stress situations. I suggest to you that the kind of person the GP poster is talking about may well be quite capable of handling the stress, but prefers to avoid the problem situation in the first place by working for a more professional organisation instead.
That's the great thing about recruitment processes: they're two-way deals, and revealing in both directions. If the interviewer is an ass, or you're good but your CV doesn't get past the HR weenies for some silly reason, then you can pretty much always bet that the corporate culture is poor and the employer isn't somewhere you want to work anyway, so not getting the interview or walking out early is no problem.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
First step is to run top, not to check the network. Just like the first step, when a car will crank over but won't start, isn't to pop the hood and start fiddling with the wires, but to check the gas gauge.
Always eliminate the easy things first.
Actually, I never had anyone walk out. Since it was presented as roleplay of a real world situation, and I'd explain the details of the situation calmly and clearly, it was evident that it was an extreme example.
What a competent interviewer would do is set up a VM with the problem they want diagnosed. That way, there wouldn't be any need to set up a fake "situation" where the "real fault" can be any number of things, including ones that don't match what you have established in your head.
Of course, if you can't handle an environment with occasional actual preparation for your job (e.g., interviewing), I wouldn't want you to work with me.
That's the last thing I'd ever want is a stressful situation to come up, and an employee walking out because it was "too hard".
Being "yelled at" by a superior is not a "stressful situation". It's unprofessional behavior. Being told politely and calmly that there is a problem that needs to be fixed quickly because the company is losing $X million per hour is a "stressful situation".
You sound like an angry person, having a power trip with a guy who needs a job to make a living. I am sorry if your 'professional' experience involves people doing that to you. I bet you have 'motivational' posters in your office as well. As many others here, I will just walk out of a job interview if yelled at. Yours is yours is just misplaced anger. Grow up.
You have to deal with stress, but not disrespect or yelling. The problem there is the yeller, and I don't know a single workplace I've ever been in where someone acting like that wouldn't be disciplined or fired. In fact, the few who I've seen try that *were* fired. If someone came in yelling at me I'd tell him to fuck up and refuse to work on the issue until he came back calm. We are not your whipping boys, you will treat your employees in a respectful manner, or you'll get either nothing from them or their resignation, like you deserve.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
You said this:
For the sake of the scenario, ... you are sitting at a desk where you have both any tools required on your desktop, ...
And this:
Some just stare at you dumbfounded without a clue if they don't have Google in front of them.
Not to be a jerk, but make up your mind. For many purposes, Google is an invaluable tool. The skill you want is the ability to think for one's self--and some may have enough knowledge to know which keywords to look for.
... And maybe I'm good enough to be picky, but I wouldn't want to work for anyone who yelled at me (even role-playing) in an interview.