Slashdot Mirror
Tough Tests Flunk Good Programming Job Candidates
snydeq writes "Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister discusses the use of quizzes and brain-teasers in evaluating potential software development hires, a practice that seems to be on the rise. 'The company best known for this is Google. Past applicants tell tales of a head-spinning battery of coding problems, riddles, and brain teasers, many of which seem only tangential to the task of software development. Other large companies have similar practices — Facebook and Microsoft being two examples,' McAllister writes. 'You'll need to assess an applicant's skill in one way or another, but it's also possible to take the whole interview-testing concept too far. Here are a few thoughts to keep in mind when crafting your test questions, to avoid slamming the door on candidates unnecessarily.'"
This would be preferable to what one company I applied for a job with did recently. Gave me a fairly straight forward maths problem involving modulus, gave me about *5* seconds to solve it using real code and not just pseudocode. Sure, that was fine. Then they added the caveat 'What if % is an expensive operation? how would you work around it?'. Turns out it was a trick question. They were expecting you to statically store the result explicitly instead of finding different maths that achieved the same result dynamically but more efficiently. less than 2 seconds later the interviewer interjected with the answer before I had a chance to even say or do anything right *or* wrong.
I don't see how *this* particular kind of quizzing *can* weed good candidates from bad, it's stacked against everyone equally. It's hostile. I'm pretty sure they didn't ever find the 'right' candidate.
I'm all for puzzles and quizzes to test someone's experience and ability and problem solving skills during job applications, but they MUST a) be unambiguous otherwise you're just being a jerk, and b) must be given a reasonable amount of time to actually perform them otherwise, again, you're just being a jerk.
It seems like every job posting now has around 50-100 people who apply. To weed out this many people en masse they will make you do just about anything - tests that have little application to the job that you are applying for, bark like a dog, sing the interviewer's favorite Barbra Streisand song, paint a painting of a nice wilderness scene, tune the carburetor on the interviewer's old Triumph motorcycle... Many of the people are well-qualified and even over-qualified! To weed them out on that alone would go nowhere.
If I had to tell you how many times I've been asked something stupid and cliche like "Tell me about a time when you experienced change" or "Tell me about a time when you faced challenge" I might go postal. It's almost like HR people invent these questions to pad their interviews because they don't really understand what or who they are interviewing for. I long for the days when a hiring manager or, god forbid, the company owner/proprietor calls and asks you "So, tell me what you are about and tell me why you think I should hire you."
They can treat applicants like total bastards and get away with it. With this kind of market what is really to stop them?
Or their objective isn't specifically verifying the individual in front of them.
Picture this: a hiring manager at some medium company reads an article about the brain teasers asked by Microsoft and Google interviewers. He wants his application process to seem more like theirs so they can say they are doing MS / Google style interviews (which sounds good to other managers and executives and theoretically impresses applicants).
On a side note i'm not that great with people skills so while i write the tests i no longer do the interviews - last too applicants ended up crying during the tests.
Huh, you might work for my company. An entire software department in a company I may know about has jumped ship wholesale, with one person literally getting up and walking out with no notice, and chatter of the remainder leaving, because its run by an insecure touretty-aspie asshole.
The funny thing is, he (you?) asks all new hires how they can "think outside the box" and make the department better. When people actually bring up useful suggestions, he gets all butthurt and snappy and puts them on his shit-list for making him feel stupid, harassing them at every opportunity. He's certainly one of you, raised in an affluent household and given everything he wanted while mommy made excuses for his rotten behavior. Working for the company is a double-edged sword - it is impossible to be fired for anything short of murder. It's hell when you get stuck with the wrong boss.
But Ethanol, isn't harassment illegal?
In corporate Amerika, harassment is not illegal unless the harassment falls under a protected category like race or gender. That means your boss yelling at you daily for inadvertently making him look stupid is not really harassment.
But Ethanol, why doesn't anybody complain?
Because the economy sucks and some people have families to feed. The ones who don't would not dare jeopardize their good references within the company, because nobody likes a complainer. You know those 3-page exit surveys you get? HR laughs at them and tosses them in the trash anyway.