Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google, Microsoft In Epic Hiring War

Posted by samzenpus on from the it's-raining-resumes dept.

natecochrane writes "Looking for a new job? Then Google and Microsoft have 6200 roles globally this quarter up for grabs, the first salvos in a costly war for talent. Google alone will hire 6200 engineers, executives and sales staff this year — its biggest intake ever. This story details where the biggest bucks and most fun jobs are to be had and how you can apply for them. There's even a job for an Xbox PR person — fancy being paid to play with toys all day?"

29 of 235 comments (clear)

  1. Positions in Sydney by belthize · · Score: 3, Funny

    Drat, I might have applied for one of those network security positions but sadly
    a) I don't live in Australia
    b) I have no pen testing experience.

    I've always just used them on an as needed basis. I guess I could flub my way through an interview extolling the benefits of ball point vs felt tip and maybe make up some interesting war story of the good old days and ink wells. Ultimately I doubt I could penetrate the Australian job market.

  2. And what happens is this by JamesP · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google only hires people who lucks out on their broken hiring process (yes, it's not easy for them to come up with an alternative system). Also, internal politics and B.S. starts to take its toll.

    Microsoft hires talented people, but it's then hampered by internal bureaucracy

    End result, Google tries to go 'social' and fails again. MS releases their 'meh' Zune tablet that plays for sure until next year.

    --
    how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    1. Re:And what happens is this by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      horribly broken hiring process, no kidding!

      they admit they have a lot of good people NOT get past the interview. its the worst interview process I've been thru (having been at DEC, cisco, juniper, SGI and many other famous places; I was not able to pass their 'test' the last few times I tried). my resume is almost a carbon copy of the job I interviewed for, too. and I live about 5mi from the place.

      I gave up. after trying a few times and doing in-person interviews, they just made it impossible to pass this test unless you are a recent grad (most questions were school questions and NOT industry questions).

      if you are young and fresh out of school, it may work for you. if you have many industry years under your belt, you will probably not work out there. also, if they feel you are not able to drink their koolaid, they won't want you.

      shame, though. I can't see why they think they are so special to the worldl; but they are FULL of attitude.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:And what happens is this by Bozdune · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hiring is hard, trust me, I've done it for years. However, I claim that silly little tests and so on are just that: silly. I have turned down senior management positions at companies that think they have some sort of Golden Test that candidates need to pass.

      There are really only two things to evaluate: (1) Is the candidate smart? and (2) Can the candidate be effective in the position? The first is easy; anyone can tell within the first few minutes of talking to a person whether that person has the minimum IQ necessary to be successful. The second is tougher, and requires a holistic view of communication skills, motivation, and interest level. Skills are secondary; any competent programmer can learn something new, and my personal experience has been that experienced people who are given the chance to learn something new out-perform people who have been doing the same thing for years.

    3. Re:And what happens is this by swillden · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hiring is hard, trust me, I've done it for years. However, I claim that silly little tests and so on are just that: silly. I have turned down senior management positions at companies that think they have some sort of Golden Test that candidates need to pass.

      Google doesn't have a "Golden Test". I'll describe Google's process below.

      There are really only two things to evaluate: (1) Is the candidate smart? and (2) Can the candidate be effective in the position?

      Yes, those are the things you need to figure out, but no, neither of them is very easy to evaluate. Especially not when you set your standards as high as Google does. Your approach to evaluating intelligence is especially flawed -- there are lots of people who can talk the talk, but can't perform when given problems to solve.

      Here's Google's interview process (the engineering interview process; I don't know about sales, etc.):

      The first step is optional, and depends on various things. It's a phone screen. Usually about one hour long, it involves a series of computer science/algorithms questions, and sometimes includes some coding as well, using a shared editor over the web. This screen has nothing to do with the hire/no-hire decision, it's just a filter to verify that it's not a waste of time to bring the candidate on-site.

      The on-site interview takes five hours, each hour an interview by another engineer. One of the five "interviews" is lunch, and it has no effect on the hire/no-hire decision; it's mostly an opportunity for the candidates to ask questions and to talk about Google culture.

      Each of the actual interviewers gets to ask whatever questions they like (though with some guidance from HR about what kinds of questions need to be avoided). However, there are some recommendations: Questions should be focused on technical topics that evaluate candidates' problem-solving and coding skills, and at least one coding problem must be included. Google interviewers pay no attention to what you have done in the past, except maybe to break the ice and perhaps as a source of technical topics to discuss. Mostly, they ask serious CS questions, requiring you to design (and implement) algorithms to solve problems, and to evaluate the real and asymptotic efficiency of your solutions, and to discuss issues related to scaling your solutions to Google scale (meaning really, really huge).

      Afterwards, each interviewer writes up their thoughts, complete with the code you wrote. They do comment a bit on cultural fit, but unless you're really just impossible to work with (e.g. extremely arrogant) that's unlikely to be a problem. Mostly they discuss your problem-solving approach and ability and your coding ability. Each interviewer also rates you on a scale from 0 to 4, and gives their hire/no-hire recommendation. Google's process minimizes and discourages communication between the interviewers, because they don't want one interviewer with an excessively negative or positive opinion to affect the other interviewers' opinions.

      After all reviewers have submitted their feedback, the data is compiled and delivered to a hiring committee (again a group of engineers, perhaps with a manager or two, but mostly engineers -- and Google managers are all engineers, too). Based on that information they have to come to a consensus decision to hire, reject or request more interviews (the latter is rare). Candidates who are rejected are not allowed to interview again for six months.

      In rare cases, the decision of this hiring committee may be overridden by another, higher-level committee.

      At all levels, the direction given to interviewers and committee members is to lean towards rejection. False negatives are perceived as less painful to the company than false positives, so the process is negatively biased.

      Is the system perfect? Clearly not, and Google recognizes that and is constantly looking for ways to improve it. I'm not sure how muc

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:And what happens is this by Bozdune · · Score: 2

      If you're interested in IQ, give the candidate an IQ test. That's what "how well do you do on my stupid little problem under pressure" tests actually measure; except they measure IQ badly, because they have not been refined for the last 50 years by cognitive psychologists, and therefore they have no statistical validity. If IQ is the criterion, then give the candidates the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, which is over in 10 minutes, takes no skill to administer, correlates .9 or better with IQ, and has extremely high repeat validity.

      With regard to job skills, if a candidate has a solid record of accomplishment, which is easy for an experienced engineer to evaluate with just a few tough questions, then they can probably do the job -- unless it is a job that requires unusually specific skills that they don't have, that cannot be mastered without years of hacking.

      If the candidate is fresh out of school, maybe I could see some standard eval tests being devised to try to figure out what the person actually knows. But I can tell you this: the best hires I've ever made wouldn't necessarily have done well on real-time, random, stupid-ass coding tests.

      Google's loss, my gain.

    5. Re:And what happens is this by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      a truly strict meritocracy is race, gender and culture-blind.

      BZZT wrong. A truly strict meritocracy is indeed blind, and does not take any external factors into mind. It hires only those most qualified, which, due to America's discrimination towards blacks, results in substandard schooling for blacks. Thus, any African-Americans applying must receive extra points for not being white. What is Google's racial makeup, and how does it resemble America? Are there too many whites or Asians, as seems likely? Sometimes, a lowering of hiring standards is necessary to enjoy the full benefits of multiculturalism. This in no way reflects negatively on Google.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  3. Re:numbers?? by shortscruffydave · · Score: 2

    Yes I read...do you?

    So MS and G have 6200 roles this quarter.

    If Google are hiring 6200 this year, then it infers that Google will hire 6200 in the first quarter, and then none in the next 3 quarters (giving the 6200 this year).

    And from those numbers it still leaves Microsoft with zero over either time period.

  4. Re:numbers?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    First, it implies, you infer. Second, it doesn't imply that at all, and if you infer that then you're a fucking idiot.

  5. Epic? by drej · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is it really necessary to refer to EVERYTHING as "epic"?

    1. Re:Epic? by wjousts · · Score: 2

      Dude, your comment was EPIC!

    2. Re:Epic? by Noughmad · · Score: 2

      It certainly isn't lyric.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  6. The Down Side by Soong · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The down side is that you may wind up in a mediocre soul-sucking job in a giant corporation. Both companies have a few glitzy positions, but unless you come in as a rock star, those positions aren't for you - they're for people with seniority who got in 5-10 years ago. You might get lucky and play office politics and hitch a ride on someone's rising star. You might get unlucky and get backwater projects that nobody cares about but nobody has the cajones to properly cancel.
    </bitter>

    --
    Start Running Better Polls
    1. Re:The Down Side by ethanms · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You might get unlucky and get backwater projects that nobody cares about but nobody has the cajones to properly cancel.

      One man's trash is another man's treasure...... you're describing my dream job! Low pressure, job security... yes please! :)

  7. Don't want them by 1s44c · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Google blindly assumes everyone wants to work for Google. They are dead wrong. So they have 20% time? Big F-ing deal, I work for myself and would not have it any other way.

    It reminds me of the way a lot of American's are utterly convinced that everyone wants to move to America.

    1. Re:Don't want them by Sedated2000 · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure how the last comment applies to the discussion here. I'm American, and don't know anyone who thinks that everyone wants to move here. Further, I can't recall ever hearing strangers say that either.

  8. Re:numbers?? by kmdrtako · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, let me spell it out for you–

    Google + Microsoft = 6200 this quarter.

    Google = 6200 this year ~== 1550 per quarter.

    Which might suggest that Microsoft will hire the other 4550 this quarter.

    Does that help?

    (No, I'm not the AC that called you a f*cking idiot.)

  9. Re:numbers?? by shortscruffydave · · Score: 4, Informative

    I acknowledge that I failed to interpret the numbers correctly, and thank those who provided clarification. In particular, I thank those who did so without use of insult or obscenity.

  10. Slashdot article a year from now, by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    after the social web stock market crash of 2012, aka, the twitpocalypse/ the facebpalm:

    "Google, Microsoft announce record layoffs"

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:Slashdot article a year from now, by MareLooke · · Score: 2

      After having worked on a stock exchange for some time I consider every market crash a "facepalm". Basing our entire economy on perception just is bound to go wrong time and again.

  11. Re:Yea.. not a big deal by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But not necessarily qualified people.

    At least in my market, solid technical people aren't hurting for work. YMMV.

  12. Google produced more with fewer people by nysus · · Score: 2

    What exactly is Google doing with all those developers? They don't seem to come out with near as many cutting edge features as they did 7 or 8 years ago when they rolling out new products like crazy.

    --

    ---Technology will liberate us if it doesn't enslave us first.

  13. Don't do it by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Look at Austin Meyers, he wrote the X-Plane flight simulator, beat Microsoft at it, and made millions of dollars. If you're smart, start your own business. It's not less work but you'll be your own boss and can choose your own work time and pace. In any case don't go for big stock market companies, they might sack you any time, managers will boss you around, the company gets all the copyright and credits, and it might get sold out at any time (see e.g. Sun).

    1. Re:Don't do it by 1s44c · · Score: 2

      Look at Austin Meyers, he wrote the X-Plane flight simulator, beat Microsoft at it, and made millions of dollars. If you're smart, start your own business. It's not less work but you'll be your own boss and can choose your own work time and pace. In any case don't go for big stock market companies, they might sack you any time, managers will boss you around, the company gets all the copyright and credits, and it might get sold out at any time (see e.g. Sun).

      This guy knows what he is talking about. Working for yourself is always better than being a pawn in someone else's political game. It's not easy money though.

  14. Microsoft Employment Contract = FAIL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I read the Microsoft employment contract last month and walked away. It was draconian and large amounts of unenforcible paragraphs intended to scare me into behaving a certain way off-hours. I spoke with a MS solution designer last month - he was a really great guy, but he saw major issues for Microsoft hiring due to all the FLOSS developers not being interested in wearing the chains MS requires.

    No thanks for me either.

    Anyone have a google employment contract ... probably the one that says you need to spend 20% of your work time on personal tech hobbies at work? It would be interesting to see side-by-side.

    Which company would you rather work for, given a choice?

    Personally, I'll never work directly for a huge company again. Having your own company means all sorts of freedom, including the freedom to choose lifestyle over money.

  15. Auto industry is similar now by gr8_phk · · Score: 2

    Between the big 3 and the tier 1 suppliers, Detroit is in a similar situation. Particularly in power electronics for EV and hybrid applications. The number of vehicle applications is exploding, and the number of people with the right background is already spread thin. If you do embedded software or controls or power electronics, there is demand for you - and we have cheap housing :-) The city is an economic crater, but the suburbs are a fine place to live.

  16. also known as 'age discrimination' laundering by decora · · Score: 2

    they can ask a bunch of questions about the latest fad in academia, which is doubly easy now because universities all put their senior class syllabuses online.

    then they only take people who pass.

    is this age discrimination? oh but of course not, inspector! we are only taking people who know their stuff!

    result: much less costs for google, in health insurance, in wages, in ability to tell people what to do (old folks tend to know their rights more), etc etc etc.

    1. Re:also known as 'age discrimination' laundering by j_l_larson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was doing well on a phone interview with Google until I casually revealed that CS was my second career (e.g. I'm "old"). The interviewer almost hung up on me right then, and scrambled to end the call quickly. If you happen to go to their campus, you'll be hard pressed to find any bald heads or silver hair anywhere. The vast majority of them are under 30, seriously.

  17. and yet we defeated hitler by decora · · Score: 3, Insightful

    by taking ordinary people, and asking them do extraordinary things

    i wonder, if modern corporate douchebags had been in charge of wwii, would we have ever stormed the beach at normandy ? or would they sit around with their thumb up their ass for 5 years waiting for 'good soldiers' to apply to the army.