

Programmer auditions – Actors do it, so why shouldn't developers? - wfaler
https://codequalified.com/blog/2014/09/03/programmer-auditions-actors-do-it-so-why-shouldnt-developers/

======
dragonwriter
> Programmer auditions -- Actors do it, so why shouldn't developers?

Programmer auditions that are analogous to what actors do would involve doing
actual development work on the actual code based used by the hiring firm
(potentially working with one or more other developers, who may either be on
staff, hired specifically for the audition process, or also auditioning), the
same way that actor auditions involve performing actual scenes from the actual
work for which the actor is auditioning.

But, of course, under terms which prevent the hiring firm from making any
_use_ of the work product without hiring the auditioning programmer.

But auditions are a fairly expensive tool for evaluating applicants and is
generally used for performers when the act of performance is itself the output
and is highly specific to the particular work and for which there is no real
substitute screening tool (some key points of which -- particularly the high
specificity to the particular work and the absence of a suitable substitute --
may well be true of developers, making real auditions as I discuss above
potentially useful for them, if quite expensive), but this article _isn 't
about auditions at all_, its about selling a platform for automating standard
programming interview exercises, but its using the strained metaphor of
"auditons" as an attention getter (but nothing in the article even addresses
any substance to the comparison to auditions, fairly immediately switching to
discussing what this is really about -- making interviewees take a _test_
rather than perform an audition -- and its clear that "developer auditions" is
just a a new weird brand name for programming tests with automated scoring
that Code Qualified is trying to sell as a service.

------
m_t
> Personally, I prefer the “audition” being a problem/task for the developer
> to be sent out, allowing the candidate to do the test in the comfort of
> their own home, with their editor or IDE of choice, using proper build- and
> version control tools[...]

If your test requires the developer to use some version control tools, this
probably means that it'll take an extended period of time. At that point, you
should pay her or him for that "test".

------
danaw
Because programmers aren't performers.

------
Quizz
The problem is that the "audition" is valuable work product that can be
redeployed and has value to the employer whereas if a theatric audition is
recorded and ever used in the final movie or anywhere, then that actor will
get paid, period.

------
nickyisaacs
Full face helmets - Race car drivers wear them, so why shouldn't developers?

