
How Heroku Works - Hiring - craigkerstiens
http://www.craigkerstiens.com/2011/12/02/how-heroku-works-hiring/
======
jsnell
If this is really the hiring process they use, it must be seriously limiting
their candidate pool. At least it seems like it'd be hard to find anybody with
a full-time job who would be able to devote some unknown number of days to do
real work for a company as part of the interview process. Finding good people
who are additionally willing to do it for free must be even harder.

I guess it'd be fine if you just want to hire consultants, students or the
unemployed. Am I misunderstanding something about that post?

~~~
kkowalczyk
It's not an unknown number of days. It's 1-2 days.

Major companies with good hiring processes (Microsoft, Google) require 1-2
full days of your time for the interviews, so it's not different time-wise.
The difference is that instead of talking to several people for 1hr each, you
spend the time coding.

If you ask me, coding is better as a way of judging if someone knows how to,
you know, code.

~~~
codemac
Um, the 1-2 days for interviews (at least for google) were not contiguous.

------
brandonb
Cool article. Once the starter project is done, what are the main criteria you
apply to make a hire/no-hire decision? Does the hiring manager make the
decision alone, or does the team debate the person?

Have you found any skills that are harder to evaluate through starter projects
than through traditional whiteboard interviews?

~~~
craigkerstiens
Hiring comes down to the team or employees that have talked to the candidate.
Everyone gives their feedback and a number rating to the hiring manager. Its
up to the hiring manager to then take that info and know whether its a
unanimous yes or if there's reservations from individuals and pass.

------
cnlwsu
Am I the only person unable to open this link? cache here:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4ANyZnz...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4ANyZnzhLM8J:www.craigkerstiens.com/2011/11/07/how-
heroku-works-maker-day/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

~~~
timmaxw
I can't open the link either. But your link doesn't seem to refer to the same
article. Google's cache is from November 30th, and the article was posted
today.

------
waffle_ss
Not sure I understand the graph... what does the Y axis measure?

~~~
craigkerstiens
It's not an entirely accurate graph, the basic idea is that by having a
different hiring manager from your actual manager you start at point 0 on how
much someone can contribute and succeed. The interview and starter project
process can actually be viewed as part of an on-boarding process.

------
user911302966
"Engineer, engineer, engineer"

Good thing you guys aren't a Canadian company, lest you be fined into non-
existence. Seriously, folks, call your employees what they are. Programmers,
DBAs, Sysadmins.

I personally appreciate the work that Heroku has done with PostgreSQL, but I'm
ate up when I see technology companies (whom are employers of the previously
listed titles) refer to their employees as 'engineers'.

~~~
mbell
This is really backwards thinking. The regulation of 'Engineer' has not grown
to support the concept of the modern world. The laws in Canada were enacted as
a result non-qualified people designing bridges and buildings that fell over.
At the time almost all 'Engineering' actively had a life safety component, the
same is far from true today.

Those fields that still life safety components are of course regulated,
primarily through PE licensing but there certain is no reason not to properly
use the term 'Engineer' when its due.

For what its worth my degree is in electrical engineering and have never even
considered getting a PE license, its not applicable in the fields I work in.

~~~
amackera
I have a degree in Computer Engineering, but I've never got a PE license
either. The important thing is that I don't ever call myself an _Engineer_. I
am a programmer, or developer, or whatever; calling myself an Engineer would
be dishonest.

I don't think it's backwards thinking so much as an important distinction
between how Canada uses the word "Engineer" and how much of the rest of the
(English speaking) world does.

~~~
mbell
I don't see how calling yourself an 'Engineer' is dishonest, adding
'Professional Engineer' or 'PE' to your title would be dishonest as those
terms have regulatory meaning.

'Engineering is the discipline, art, skill and profession of acquiring and
applying scientific, mathematical, economic, social, and practical knowledge,
in order to design and build structures, machines, devices, systems, materials
and processes that safely realize improvements to the lives of people.'

Regardless of the formal designation of 'PE' or other designation many people
do fit the term 'Engineer'.

The real issue is that some limited jurisdictions have decided that 'Engineer'
must equal 'PE'. That doesn't make the use of the term 'Engineer' improper
outside those jurisdictions nor does it make the choice to equate the two
concepts universally correct.

~~~
amackera
Though I understand and largely agree with your argument, the reason why _I_
don't call myself an Engineer is that I know that people may not understand
the distinction.

I legally cannot call myself a "Professional Engineer". In order to prevent
unintentionally misleading people, I stay as far from the word "Engineer" as
possible.

I suppose it's not really dishonest. I depends more on the individual's
intentions.

