Having devs work on real projects for a company without pay shouldn't be allowed. A while back, the place I worked at talked to a few consultants about improving the interview process. One was supposed to be a 'industry leader' on being a advocate for developer interview and improving the process, but they suggested something that really irritated me...
The "try before you buy". In other words, make candidates work on real world projects instead of a interview...without pay. I can go on for an entire blog post on why this is actually a terrible way to find candidates.
I interview a fair amount of candidates and I see some major issues in the industry (this is my 2 cents here)
Twitter and other social media preach "online brand, side-projects, portfolio, get a high follower count, keep blogging" so much that many beginners just get burnt out even before they get their first job!
Interviewing candidates is a skill that needs to be developed. Many developers spend time on developing their personal skills, but interviewing candidates is usually not one of them. It's often easier for senior developers to run pop-quiz style interviews or rely on take home tests then to evaluate a developer.
Different companies/projects have their own required skillset so there always will be a 'interview process' of some sort. One of the frequent things my 'tech friends' and I always discuss with each other is the interview process and how to make it better.
I feel safe taking about it within a circle of friends because we talk about what processes works and those that do not...but still being respectful of what our employers require. It's really hard to have such a discussion on social media because it always turns into a yelling match since there will always be people who hate a particular style.
Right now, my personal preference is to have 'discussions' about the required skillset with the candidate. There are no right or wrong answers and focuses on communication and attitude (are they a jerk or condescending when they talk about things). But it's not just the candidate talking, it's both of us. In my experience, if you can have a good conversation about JavaScript to a developer, you don't need to test their knowledge on syntax (ie coding tests).
I'm not saying this method is perfect either. There are problems to this approach as well.
I "do" look at portfolio projects, but only at a high level but it's not a must have. Many solid developers don't have side projects. Even I don't have any.
Just a disclaimer, I don't think any method is perfect and I have changed my mind and methods over the years.
Thanks for this. This is a great response. I really want to organize a large group conversation in some form about this. I think the more perspectives, the better. But I’m so maxed out rn. Maybe sometime in 2021.
If you’re interested, I’d love to add you to the list for my tbd meeting 🤣
You make very good points.
Having devs work on real projects for a company without pay shouldn't be allowed. A while back, the place I worked at talked to a few consultants about improving the interview process. One was supposed to be a 'industry leader' on being a advocate for developer interview and improving the process, but they suggested something that really irritated me...
The "try before you buy". In other words, make candidates work on real world projects instead of a interview...without pay. I can go on for an entire blog post on why this is actually a terrible way to find candidates.
I interview a fair amount of candidates and I see some major issues in the industry (this is my 2 cents here)
Twitter and other social media preach "online brand, side-projects, portfolio, get a high follower count, keep blogging" so much that many beginners just get burnt out even before they get their first job!
Interviewing candidates is a skill that needs to be developed. Many developers spend time on developing their personal skills, but interviewing candidates is usually not one of them. It's often easier for senior developers to run pop-quiz style interviews or rely on take home tests then to evaluate a developer.
Different companies/projects have their own required skillset so there always will be a 'interview process' of some sort. One of the frequent things my 'tech friends' and I always discuss with each other is the interview process and how to make it better.
I feel safe taking about it within a circle of friends because we talk about what processes works and those that do not...but still being respectful of what our employers require. It's really hard to have such a discussion on social media because it always turns into a yelling match since there will always be people who hate a particular style.
Right now, my personal preference is to have 'discussions' about the required skillset with the candidate. There are no right or wrong answers and focuses on communication and attitude (are they a jerk or condescending when they talk about things). But it's not just the candidate talking, it's both of us. In my experience, if you can have a good conversation about JavaScript to a developer, you don't need to test their knowledge on syntax (ie coding tests).
I'm not saying this method is perfect either. There are problems to this approach as well.
I "do" look at portfolio projects, but only at a high level but it's not a must have. Many solid developers don't have side projects. Even I don't have any.
Just a disclaimer, I don't think any method is perfect and I have changed my mind and methods over the years.
Thanks for this. This is a great response. I really want to organize a large group conversation in some form about this. I think the more perspectives, the better. But I’m so maxed out rn. Maybe sometime in 2021.
If you’re interested, I’d love to add you to the list for my tbd meeting 🤣
for sure, I'd love to help where I can.
Don't burn out tho!
Trying to figure out how to avoid that 😭