So where is the fundamental argument against monocultures? The paypal founder seems to disagree? Is it just political correctness, or is there some hard data?
In theory I am all for diversity, but I can imagine that in some endeavours it helps if you get along with the people in your team. I don't think "hiring what you know" is really that much of a mistake. I would hire my friends, for example, because I already know I get along with them.
The fundamental argument is that if you hire more similar people, you will get similar results. Are you a billionaire yet? If not, maybe you should hire some different types of people in order to deliver different results.
People with different mindsets will challenge you. They will disagree with your decisions. They will think of different approaches that may be much better than what you are doing. If you let them, they may drastically improve your business.
Are your friends the best fit for the job? What if someone likes different music and whatever but is ten times as effective at that type of position? I would consider the latter far more important. You're hiring people to do a job, not socialize with.
Programming test, discussing past experience (things they did, things they're proud of, where things went wrong, etc), etc.
You're attempting to determine passion and curiosity by doing a "joel test", which is poor because you're biasing it towards people who have the same history as you. A better alternative is to ask for opinions, people who have opinions about programming practices/paradigms/languages/etc is a good signal for someone who is curious about their craft. Uncurious people never think deeply about what they're doing. People who care form opinions and ideas about what is good vs bad. It doesn't really matter what the opinions are, just that they have them and have some rationale for backing it up.
Examples: What is your opinion of Javascript as a lanaguage? * Whats your favorite language/least favorite language that you use/worst feature of your favorite language? Whats your opinion of the state of web development/how would you improve it? Static vs Dynamic typing? Functional vs Object oriented?
I think that's the point of the poster you're replying to. You examine the merits of someone's argument, not the fact they're one of the paypal founders. That is specifically the cult of personality referred to.
Some people on this site seem to be desperate to fulfill the rituals they think will lead to success. Most of success is pure luck, combined with some preparation and ability to deliver.
"That is specifically the cult of personality referred to."
But you are merely doing the same thing, except that you revere the author of the article more than the PayPal founder. Why should the article writer be more right than the PayPal founder?
This is the 'atheism is just another religion' argument, or the 'not being racist is just another racial preference' argument. You can't see the difference?
I don't know anything about dkarapetyan other than I agree with them that too many look to a cult of personality to give them the rituals to achieve the same sort of success.
Whereas "paypal founder" is an intended signal, that if you do what they suggest, you will have similar success as "paypal founder."
Probably should have replied here rather than above. Anyway, as I mentioned there, there is a ton of hard data showing mono-cultures generally being outperformed by diverse groups. Lots available as public research, you just have to look for it. You may have to pay for some journal access though. Hiring-what-you-know has been pretty much nailed down as a major mistake with hard data, but is also one that most people make.
I've been in both kinds of environments and I much prefer diversity. It's way too easy to burn out in a monoculture. I like working with people that have hobbies and passions both within and outside of work. It's just better on all sorts of levels to be in that kind of environment instead of one where people just parrot whatever is on the front page of HN. You learn more and consequently grow more as an individual in that kind of environment. That's all anecdotal but I'm not sure what you'd search for to find actual research on the matter. Micro studies show diverse groups often come up with better and more creative solutions when faced with novel problems.
Well I am all for people hiring or entering companies based on their preferences. If you prefer diversity, sure, go for it. I just don't see the sense in dictating people their preferences.
It's a good thing that there are all sorts of companies. There are companies where everybody has to wear a uniform all day, and companies where people work in their underwear all day (because they work from home). Some people might prefer the one, others the other. But then to write "everybody should be working in their underwear at all times" is just bullshit.
Maybe the underwear people will outperform the uniform people. In 20 years there would be only underwear companies left. Or vice versa. Or there will always be a mix. But if you want to predict that ("I claim that underwear programmers will outperform uniform programmers"), you should provide some very good arguments.
People do what it takes to get a job. With the exception of 3 or 4 people you really know, that friend of yours, thats not a real friend, he couldn't care less about you. What you have is an employee skilled in pretending to be your friend.
It was the only job requirement!
You met him because you "accidentally" ran into him. You get along with him because he is a great performer. He likes the same music, wears the same cloths, has the same hobbies etc etc. You don't know who he is, it is all make believe, he doesn't even like organic carrots. When you close the door behind you he is glad you are gone.
You've recruited a psychopath[0] who smiles pretty when you desire it. If he doesn't smile you might fire him! Smiling at you is the only skill required to get the job and the tenure. He doesn't have real skills or at least very crappy ones.
If he didn't start out like that you can still make a real friend into one. Might take a few years before they get tired of your ravings about organic carrots. That way they can gradually practice the act you desire from them.
That's a zero value argument because psychopaths will mimic whatever criterion you have. So the argument "psychopaths will hack your criterion" is worthless.
And the point in things like musical taste and blogs is that they are not that easy to fake. You have to make a real investment (spend time listening to music, reading,...). That's the point of signaling, which is what muscial taste is.
I never said you shouldn't have a work-sample test. But I doubt everybody who can code is an equally good hire for every company.
As for work sample tests, there are also those who criticize programming tests because they say people might just be bothered by the interview situation and in reality be much better programmers. If you let the candidate do it at home, they can fake it by letting somebody else do the coding.
I personally would certainly want to see some demonstration of programming skill.
In theory I am all for diversity, but I can imagine that in some endeavours it helps if you get along with the people in your team. I don't think "hiring what you know" is really that much of a mistake. I would hire my friends, for example, because I already know I get along with them.