Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Our current hiring process at my startup:

- After a first non-technical call, we ask the candidate to create a very small project based on our SDK. We send him the documentation and a very small sample. He can almost use every tools he wants to create that small project and, of course, we do not set any deadlines. It allows us to see how the candidate architecture his applications and it gives us a project to discuss during the following call. - If all goes well, we invite the candidate on site to present our code/project and eventually brainstorm together. So that both parties can see if they can work together and the candidate has an insight about how we work, how our code looks like.

Clearly, it's far from perfect and we are often considering changing it. Imagine if every company where you are applying would ask you to create an app from scratch with their SDK? We may lose some candidates, but at least we hire only people that fit the company's culture.




I have experienced "interviews" like this from the other end. I told YC funded founders I'm not interested in their job if this is how they interview. In my opinion, it shows inability to make a decision.

I am an excellent developer, with years of experience in the industry. I know lots of technologies, and already have a great job. There is no reason for me to spend personal time writing your projects, when I would be rewarded by spending personal time on my employer's projects.

"Interviews" like this will only grab candidates with nothing better to do than to fulltime interview with your company. In my opinion, the best people already have jobs, and you're excluding them from the process.


I forgot to precise that if the candidate has an (significant) open source project we use it instead of sending the assignment.

I hope no company will make their decision just because a candidate says that he is an excellent developer ;)


"I am an excellent developer, with years of experience", but seemingly unable or unwilling to complete a small practical test. Sounds to me like they are good at weeding out the wrong people.


Check my comment history. I work at Google. I stand on that.


What makes you think "I work at Google" provides sufficient data to an interviewer such that they should exempt you from their interviewing process? The fact that you have a job somewhere else says very little.


I'm not saying I'm immune from interviews. I'm saying it's proof I have chops.

Technical interviewing in a broken process. I've given almost 200 technical interviews at Google, and I've seen all kinds of results. But, I believe Google's results. Having worked at Google longer than anywhere else I've ever worked, I can say that the people are incredible, and it's a direct result of the interviewing process. We interview someone for a set number of interviews (N≤8 nowadays) and we make a decision. I can count on one hand the number of people I think are deadwood.

All I'm saying is the "interview" process of having people do projects for you is broken. You will filter out a lot of people with jobs they are kicking butt at.


If you have a great job there is no reason for you to spend personal time participating in any kind of interviewing process.

Also, who says "I am an excellent developer"?


You should always be looking for jobs. I got my present job at Google even when I was quite happy with my previous work.

Also, please avoid ad hominem attacks.


The magic of open sores: what's your Github?

This should be easy to settle and show up the other guy. ;)




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: