IMHO the current process gives the wrong people too much influence on the hiring decision. And by "wrong people" I mean developers and the potential future team members - yeah, unpopular opinion, I guess. So let me explain.
First of all - it's not a developer's primary job to evaluate candidates, most of us have absolutely no training for this task. Don't get me wrong - I know that it takes a good developer to know a good developer. Who else would be able to judge the skills of someone than a master of the skills? But this falls short when only developers have a vote in the hiring process, because then the only value you see in a candidate is their (technical) skills.
But it gets worse. What skills are being judged specifically? Well, of course the skills your developers already know - or do you know of a fellow frontend developer saying "well, he doesn't know react, but I would hire him for the java backend skills he told me he has, even though I have no idea of java and backend thing myself"? I for one would not say something like this.
Last, but not least, we have sympathy for people with similar interests. That's just human nature. It leads to a monoculture, not only people-wise, but also when it comes to the tech stack. Some developers are especially childish in that matter, which leads to our omnipresent framework wars, language wars, and even editor wars.
So in summary one could say that the current hiring process leads to teams of people that are all pretty much the same. These teams might be a local optimisation, mastering the current tech stack of the team. But they won't deliver the best results. Good developers need friction, need emotional debates, need the challenge against their peers in order to deliver their best results. And you only get that when people have different opinions, different passions, different people.
So the last thing you want is a team of people that are all alike. And I think this can be achieved by taking away much of the influence of developers in the hiring process, maybe cap it at 25%.
One of the most salient features of our Tech Hiring culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted.
I would also want developers with no training in hiring matter less.
An alternative way to do that is to actually give developers the training on how to hire :P
I did the job interviews at Amazon and they were quite good. You would have two people interviewing, one of them just listening to understand how to do it. Later he would lead the interviews, but still in a pair. Later he would do it alone.
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.
IMHO the current process gives the wrong people too much influence on the hiring decision. And by "wrong people" I mean developers and the potential future team members - yeah, unpopular opinion, I guess. So let me explain.
First of all - it's not a developer's primary job to evaluate candidates, most of us have absolutely no training for this task. Don't get me wrong - I know that it takes a good developer to know a good developer. Who else would be able to judge the skills of someone than a master of the skills? But this falls short when only developers have a vote in the hiring process, because then the only value you see in a candidate is their (technical) skills.
But it gets worse. What skills are being judged specifically? Well, of course the skills your developers already know - or do you know of a fellow frontend developer saying "well, he doesn't know react, but I would hire him for the java backend skills he told me he has, even though I have no idea of java and backend thing myself"? I for one would not say something like this.
Last, but not least, we have sympathy for people with similar interests. That's just human nature. It leads to a monoculture, not only people-wise, but also when it comes to the tech stack. Some developers are especially childish in that matter, which leads to our omnipresent framework wars, language wars, and even editor wars.
So in summary one could say that the current hiring process leads to teams of people that are all pretty much the same. These teams might be a local optimisation, mastering the current tech stack of the team. But they won't deliver the best results. Good developers need friction, need emotional debates, need the challenge against their peers in order to deliver their best results. And you only get that when people have different opinions, different passions, different people.
So the last thing you want is a team of people that are all alike. And I think this can be achieved by taking away much of the influence of developers in the hiring process, maybe cap it at 25%.
I disagree with you or lets say i prefer relevant people as the lesser of two evils.
Look at my root comment for more relevance.
I would also want developers with no training in hiring matter less.
An alternative way to do that is to actually give developers the training on how to hire :P
I did the job interviews at Amazon and they were quite good. You would have two people interviewing, one of them just listening to understand how to do it. Later he would lead the interviews, but still in a pair. Later he would do it alone.