Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think the article is talking about a new-hire situation, not evaluation of one's own employees' efforts.

It'd be pretty hard to get metrics like yours in a hiring situation.



"It'd be pretty hard to get metrics like yours in a hiring situation."

And who here signed up for easy?

In a new hire situation, require examples of work done (on-line or otherwise). Make them code. Give them a conditional mini-project. Get appraisals from former clients, employers, co-workers. etc. etc. etc.

I could think of a hundred better ways to evaluate unknown talent that the suggestions from this article.


I might jump though that for a 150k job and or a fairly long 150+$/h project after the interview but IMO an extended interview process is a bad sign. If you can't tell if someone can code in a 2-3 hour interview you're in really bad shape and I probably want to avoid your team and your code.

Here are some real questions to separate the coder from the poser.

What's the worst hack you have ever done and why did you do it? What's you least favorite language and why? What's the hardest problem you have ever worked on? Why was it hard and how did you solve it? What's the most elegant solution to a problem you have ever devised?

IMO: Trick questions and odd syntax issues are just as useless as asking about their IDE of choice or how to solve a trivial problem.

PS: If you want to validate my credentials after while we nail down my fee that's one thing, but I am not going to give out references early in the process.


"Here are some real questions to separate the coder from the poser."

This is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what I posted and everything I believe.

To repeat - there are NO questions or character traits to accurately assess quality from B.S.

The only differentiator is DEMONSTRATED PERFORMANCE. You need to find a way to determine this. I never suggested long interviews or trick questions (and have never employed them). Whatever it takes to determine DEMONSTRATED PERFORMANCE is necessary and sufficient.

And whoever downmodded my previous posts (and will probably take a hack at this one too) either doesn't get it or hasn't been burned yet.

(Why is it that when I willingly share my hard earned skills and knowledge, I get downmodded, and when I post a smarta$$ remark, I earn 20 unexpected points?)


I started restricting myself to smartass remarks for that reason.

By the way - a conditional mini-project seems like a good idea. Let them do something small but useful - for full pay - and evaluate performance.

I guess I could live with that on the receiving end.


"I started restricting myself to smartass remarks for that reason."

I understand why someone would do that; it's easy and fun (especially if you only have short breaks).

I implore you to reconsider. My own personal lack of peers to debate and commisserate with drives me to this site. The karma may be the gravy, but the experience is the meat. Sure would be nice to have you as part of it.


I just went from smartass remarks to citing for even easier karma. I hope you did not mind.

From a more serious point of view I agree. The quality of comments and submissions attracts me to this site, too. Thanks for the warm welcome.




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

Search: