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

while this process feels like it's hitting the sweet spot for finding out who can write brilliant code, that's half or less of the battle in hiring people. personally (and as a hiring manager), i feel like a majority of the hiring process is dependent (obviously) on the environment you're hiring into.

hiring for that small startup? you'll want multi-hat wearing people first, brilliant programmers second.

hiring for a large enterprise team? you'll want to hire for "plays well with others" first, and brilliant programmers second.

that's not to say you should hire schleps, for sure. they should at least be competent programmers. i guess what i'm saying is (despite how it sounds), hiring someone who can program brilliantly is important, but not as important as hiring someone who can navigate your company's software-making requirements successfully.

firing the brilliant engineer who thinks he's more talented than everyone else in the small company so he keeps demanding to be put in charge? yup, that's a thing. firing the brilliant engineer who fights tooth-and-nail over some inconsequential feature the product team wants to change? that's a thing too. assigning a brilliant engineer to crap, meaningless work because no one else on the team wants to work with them? yuppers -- seen it.

in any organization, you are either the only one in charge or you're following someone else's orders -- both of which require different aspects around working well with others.




> hiring for a large enterprise team? you'll want to hire for "plays well with others" first, and brilliant programmers second.

Aka, the reason why virtually all enterprise software is pure shit.


Hear hear, the "no assholes" rule is always good to apply, regardless of programmer brilliance.




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

Search: