

Train before you hire - thesethings
http://blog.codelesson.com/train-before-you-hire/

======
sayemm
Regarding training/interviewing, I just think about this awesome Steve Yegge
post: [http://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/practicing-
programm...](http://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/practicing-programming)

"It's a bit easier to tell if someone's in great shape physically than if
they're in great shape mentally. You can't just stare at their brain and hope
to find a six-pack in all those folds. It's easy to tell how physically fit
someone is. You can make people run laps, lift things, take their physical
measurements, etc.

But for determining someone's mental fitness, you pretty much have to
interview them. It it's hard to do a good job of it, since it's like running
backwards in front of the person, egging them to go faster. You have to be in
pretty good shape yourself to be a good interviewer."

------
listrophy
Standard practice at my company: interviewees pair with a developer for a week
before being offered a job. Preferably, over the week, you'd switch pairs at
least once or twice.

If we don't hire you, we pay you as a contractor for your time. If we do hire
you, we pay you either as an employee or contractor for your time (depending
on what our accountant says).

We'll bend the rules depending on circumstances, but basically you're not
getting in unless you spend 30 hours pairing with our devs. Anything else, I
propose, can be hazardous to the culture and effectiveness of your company.

~~~
imack
Doesn't that limit you to potential employees who aren't currently employed?

And what percentage of people do you "drop"? I imagine once you spend a week
with someone you might get attached to them enough that it would be hard to
let them go for something subjective unless they were a pretty big asshole.

~~~
listrophy
We're pretty young, so we haven't had too many candidates get to the interview
phase... we've "dropped" one out of 5 candidates. You have to impress us to
get to the point of spending a week with us.

As far as the "unemployed" part goes, things aren't usually as cut-and-dried
as that. Of those five, one was on the verge of being laid off, and one was a
student. The other three were gainfully employed. Being open to working
weekends with candidates makes this much more possible, though more lengthy.

We're pretty proud of who we are. If your desire to work with us is strong
enough, you'll find a way. And if you do find a way under difficult
circumstances, it says volumes about your personal drive.

~~~
tomjen3
The problem with your approach is that it only works if you can communicate
that you are a company worth doing a lot extra work to get hired at.

The approach may work for you, but most companies seem to have the idea that
they are special, when they really aren't - and frankly most people wouldn't
accept your requirements unless they where truly desperate so you will likely
have to change your approach as you grow.

~~~
khafra
Speaking as an employee of $bigcorp, I like the idea of a short period of
fairly-compensated work before committing for the long-term. Like going on a
vacation with a romantic interest before moving in together, or something. If
you go to work for the USG, your probationary period is the first year, which
seems unnecessarily long; a week seems just right.

~~~
jeffreymcmanus
The notion of a probationary period is largely mythological for places where
employment is at-will (which is most jobs in technology in the U.S.). Since
at-will employment means you can mostly be terminated for any reason at any
time, every day you go to work is really part of your probationary period.
There's no concept of a "long-term commitment" and your status as an employee
doesn't materially change after whatever "probationary period" the employer
might extend to you.

------
dgouldin
In a previous life, I was a C# dev for fat client windows apps. Without any
serious web development experience, a Django shop took a chance on me, and I
learned the whole stack on the job. I feel comfortable saying they were happy
with my work, and I came out of the experience with a new set of skills, a new
career really.

All that to say, I'm a big proponent of taking the time (and yes it does take
time) to find out if somebody is smart and willing to learn and leaving
resumes with #yrs experience in technology X to the HR monkeys. If a skill is
in demand, a latent expert is of much higher long-term value than a present
one.

------
ekanes
It's an interesting idea, but I can't help but think after reading the
following that the post is just fantastically subtle PR.

"Today I had an epiphany. Maybe the right thing to do is to enroll prospective
job applicants in some kind of low-impact training as part of the interview
process. If the training were given in a part-time, online format (like we do
at CodeLesson)..."

~~~
thesethings
I hear ya, but the agenda (mostly) doesn't matter to me. I assume corporate
blog posts are published for commercial reasons, even when it's about the
author's personal life.

And I've gotten so much value out of HN discussions that benefit the site
linkee (lots of awesome threads start out "Show HN: My new site/business").

I guess my main point is: I'm all for the business linked to getting PR, as
long as _we,_ the HN members get some cool value out of it. In this case, i
thought the post was very topical because talent/skill shortage is a
frequently talked about issue here, as are work cultural norms in general.

But I totally respect the opinion that some posts may not have an interesting
enough ideas to make PR interesting. That said, I always wait for the other
shoe to drop: the HN thread it spawns often ends up being incredible.

------
atgm
It sounds like a great idea to me! You can also get a look at prospective
employees and see how well they learn/deal with the unknown.

------
jim_h
Before I was hired for my current company, I given a quick tutorial on the
programming language (used in company) and had a quiz afterward. It's a great
way to see how fast someone can learn and see them apply that knowledge. It
was a great opportunity for me was well since it allowed me to show I had
potential.

------
ebiester
IIRC, this is how AOL used to work. Everyone started in the call center. After
6 months, you could start working your way up, and many people went into QA
and programming from there.

~~~
me2i81
Nothing attracts top-notch engineering talent like the lure of working in the
call center.

~~~
ebiester
Think of it as pre-engineering raw talent. Often, people worked these jobs
while going to college, or were recognized as talent while they were there and
bumped first into QA.

Of course, many of us instead realized we hated call centers and found part
time sysadmin jobs. :)

