This whole thing does seem a bit disconnected, but that may be because of the type of jobs and the technologies their recruits were applying to work with.
I have no idea what Triplebyte is or does, but if they do less conventional stuff or search for different kinds of developers compared to whoever answers SO surveys, would explain why these statistics look so different to what StackOverflow seems to find in their annual assessments.
Engineer at Triplebyte. I help software engineers find jobs they'll love using an efficient, credentials-blind process that's trusted by hundreds of top tech companies.
Our data comes from software engineers applying to work at a few hundred top tech companies. See triplebyte.com/blog/we-ve-raised-a... for more background -- we've helped software engineers get more than $50 million in job offers in just the past 6 months.
Instead of relying on self-reporting from a low-response-rate survey, we record what editor and programming language all engineers actually use during a two-hour technical interview with us. (You can use any programming language you like!) We don't actually use these signals to decide who we work with. Instead, we have a structured rubric and are looking for things like coding productivity, coding professionalism, and debugging skills. I've personally interviewed a lot of engineers applying to Triplebyte, and ultimately we're looking to predict whether this person has what it takes to perform well as a software engineer at one of the companies we work with. And more importantly, we use structured data from the interview to match you to companies, so we can say, "Jane is a really speedy and natural Python developer who also speaks very well about database design," from which we can match you to companies we know are looking for those strengths.
This whole thing does seem a bit disconnected, but that may be because of the type of jobs and the technologies their recruits were applying to work with.
I have no idea what Triplebyte is or does, but if they do less conventional stuff or search for different kinds of developers compared to whoever answers SO surveys, would explain why these statistics look so different to what StackOverflow seems to find in their annual assessments.
Our data comes from software engineers applying to work at a few hundred top tech companies. See triplebyte.com/blog/we-ve-raised-a... for more background -- we've helped software engineers get more than $50 million in job offers in just the past 6 months.
Instead of relying on self-reporting from a low-response-rate survey, we record what editor and programming language all engineers actually use during a two-hour technical interview with us. (You can use any programming language you like!) We don't actually use these signals to decide who we work with. Instead, we have a structured rubric and are looking for things like coding productivity, coding professionalism, and debugging skills. I've personally interviewed a lot of engineers applying to Triplebyte, and ultimately we're looking to predict whether this person has what it takes to perform well as a software engineer at one of the companies we work with. And more importantly, we use structured data from the interview to match you to companies, so we can say, "Jane is a really speedy and natural Python developer who also speaks very well about database design," from which we can match you to companies we know are looking for those strengths.
You can see triplebyte.com/interview_guide for more information about the interview in which we collect this data.