In reality, it simply isn't true that you need a portfolio. I've never had one in over 25 years, and all the best developers I've hired haven't had one. An interesting, active GitHub (or similar) account is a far better way to attract the interest of the person responsible for the hiring. A curated vanity project honestly tells them very little about you and your skills. Seeing the candidates journey/activity in its "warts and all" form on GitHub gives wayyyy more information about a candidate - you get an unfiltered idea of how they code, what kind of programming interests them, their enthusiasm for coding & design, etc.
I've rejected a good number of candidates actually because of their portfolio sites (error ridden, over-engineered, etc). A portfolio site can catch the eye, but if the hirer is doing a good job they will look past it for more honest detail, and to make sure it's not just "lipstick on a pig" (if you'll pardon the expression) 🐷
Thank you for sharing your experience. It is true that a portfolio alone may not be enough to secure a job, as it may not provide a complete picture of a candidate's skills and experience. Based on my personal experiences and input from both tech and non-tech HR professionals, I have learned that a portfolio can still be important in the hiring process. I value the additional understanding you shared about the importance of GitHub activity. Going forward, I will pay closer attention to my own GitHub activity :)
I agree that developers should be included from the initial interview. Unfortunately, it is typical for developers to only be involved in the interview process after the first or second round.
They should be involved before that IMO - would help save a lot of time. Unfortunately though, what you say is usually true - normally even more so the larger a company gets.
I'm a front-end web developer who creates responsive websites using HTML, CSS and JavaScript from design mock-ups. I'm continuously learning to improve my skills. 👩🏻💻
It depends. As a front-end developer, if I view a portfolio it can tell me:
That the developer knows how to launch a site (buy domain, set up hosting, change DNS)
How well the HTML is written (both semantics and accessibility audits)
How well the CSS is written (check mobile responsiveness, hover states, etc)
How well the JavaScript is written (are they adding JavaScript that can be accomplished by CSS?)
How fast the site loads (does the person understand web performance?)
An active Github is good but if the developer worked on projects that weren't allowed to be public because it's proprietary code, or maybe they worked with content management systems such as WordPress which doesn't typically utilize Github, then I wouldn't want to necessarily penalize them because they don't regularly code in their free time.
I completely agree with you. A portfolio can give valuable insights into a developer's skills and experience, and it's important to consider all of the factors you mentioned when evaluating it. Additionally, not having an active Github or having worked on projects that can't be made public should not be viewed as a negative, as there can be valid reasons for this.
When you see activity on GitHub, you can actually see it develop through commits, dates, forks etc. A portfolio website could well have been spat out by a profile site generator, copy-pasted from elsewhere, the result of a 'how to make a profile site that stands out' tutorial etc.
You see an end result, but it's like a portfolio of pictures from a modelling photoshoot - it isn't necessarily authentic (possibly photoshopped) and you don't get to see the how it came into being. The whole thing is skewed and distorted.
Sure, it's possible to fake a GitHub profile too (and I've come across a bunch of those from candidates - a number of different candidates even linking to the same anonymous GitHub account and claiming it as theirs!) - but it's normally quite easy to spot.
Every case is different, and I certainly wouldn't penalise a candidate for not having an active GitHub account - my point was that a portfolio site is pretty far from a necessity.
You're not wrong that it's not necessary, but we have to be mindful that the industry is a spectrum of roles and skills.
If you're applying for a C++ role at a company that's automating cars or airplanes - a portfolio isn't going to be what a hiring manager is probably interested in when evaluating you as a candidate. Github will most certainly shine better in that context.
However, if you're a front-end or UI designer applying at an agency? Chances are the hiring manager there will appeal more to visual demonstration of one's skills than the particular patterns that one uses to deliver the end result.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
In reality, it simply isn't true that you need a portfolio. I've never had one in over 25 years, and all the best developers I've hired haven't had one. An interesting, active GitHub (or similar) account is a far better way to attract the interest of the person responsible for the hiring. A curated vanity project honestly tells them very little about you and your skills. Seeing the candidates journey/activity in its "warts and all" form on GitHub gives wayyyy more information about a candidate - you get an unfiltered idea of how they code, what kind of programming interests them, their enthusiasm for coding & design, etc.
I've rejected a good number of candidates actually because of their portfolio sites (error ridden, over-engineered, etc). A portfolio site can catch the eye, but if the hirer is doing a good job they will look past it for more honest detail, and to make sure it's not just "lipstick on a pig" (if you'll pardon the expression) 🐷
Thank you for sharing your experience. It is true that a portfolio alone may not be enough to secure a job, as it may not provide a complete picture of a candidate's skills and experience. Based on my personal experiences and input from both tech and non-tech HR professionals, I have learned that a portfolio can still be important in the hiring process. I value the additional understanding you shared about the importance of GitHub activity. Going forward, I will pay closer attention to my own GitHub activity :)
Unfortunately, HR are often easily dazzled by sparkly things. Real devs should be involved in vetting candidates as early in the process as possible
I agree that developers should be included from the initial interview. Unfortunately, it is typical for developers to only be involved in the interview process after the first or second round.
They should be involved before that IMO - would help save a lot of time. Unfortunately though, what you say is usually true - normally even more so the larger a company gets.
Totally agree, Jon. :) I can confirm every single word here as Engineering Manager and developer.
It depends. As a front-end developer, if I view a portfolio it can tell me:
An active Github is good but if the developer worked on projects that weren't allowed to be public because it's proprietary code, or maybe they worked with content management systems such as WordPress which doesn't typically utilize Github, then I wouldn't want to necessarily penalize them because they don't regularly code in their free time.
I completely agree with you. A portfolio can give valuable insights into a developer's skills and experience, and it's important to consider all of the factors you mentioned when evaluating it. Additionally, not having an active Github or having worked on projects that can't be made public should not be viewed as a negative, as there can be valid reasons for this.
When you see activity on GitHub, you can actually see it develop through commits, dates, forks etc. A portfolio website could well have been spat out by a profile site generator, copy-pasted from elsewhere, the result of a 'how to make a profile site that stands out' tutorial etc.
You see an end result, but it's like a portfolio of pictures from a modelling photoshoot - it isn't necessarily authentic (possibly photoshopped) and you don't get to see the how it came into being. The whole thing is skewed and distorted.
Sure, it's possible to fake a GitHub profile too (and I've come across a bunch of those from candidates - a number of different candidates even linking to the same anonymous GitHub account and claiming it as theirs!) - but it's normally quite easy to spot.
Every case is different, and I certainly wouldn't penalise a candidate for not having an active GitHub account - my point was that a portfolio site is pretty far from a necessity.
You're not wrong that it's not necessary, but we have to be mindful that the industry is a spectrum of roles and skills.
If you're applying for a C++ role at a company that's automating cars or airplanes - a portfolio isn't going to be what a hiring manager is probably interested in when evaluating you as a candidate. Github will most certainly shine better in that context.
However, if you're a front-end or UI designer applying at an agency? Chances are the hiring manager there will appeal more to visual demonstration of one's skills than the particular patterns that one uses to deliver the end result.