Discredit of specialists or modern interviews

    Imagine that you are an IT company. Maybe big or not, but it so happened that you needed an intern. After all, it is time, finally, to raise a new generation in the spirit of your ideology.

    But bad luck - trainees are animals that do not have skills. And before they did nothing useful. How not to make a mistake in choosing? Well, that’s pretty simple. If it is impossible to evaluate by the result, then you should look for the prerequisites for achieving this result ...

    An article about the serious problem of recruiting, which for some reason is considered the norm.


    The prerequisites for achieving the result are different. For example, a sharp mind. Naturally, an important factor, but not the only one. The world knows many talented lazy people who brilliantly parasitize on the couch.

    Then we still need a certain warehouse of character, this is true.

    The combination of these qualities gives reason to believe with high probability that when absorbing knowledge, a future specialist will be able to generate a qualitative result.

    And if to identify character inclinations there is a wide range of practices that only conditionally relate to IT, then figuring out the technical abilities of the mind is our direct responsibility.

    And how will we identify technical thinking?

    We can turn to the philosophers of Ancient Greece, who had enough time to think about such things. They believed that logic is the art of reasoning and analytics.

    It turns out that the surest way is to see how a person speaks and thinks.

    We give some abstract problem and ask it to be solved by following the train of thought. But we are not too keen on unified mathematics, since in this way we lose the point on reasoning. An unusual logical task fits perfectly into these criteria.

    I especially like the sorcerer's treasure challenge
    You are an adventurer who has heard that there are countless treasures in the castle of a terrible caster. You, having a talent for all kinds of scams, decide to get there and steal these treasures.

    But it so happened that your presence did not go unnoticed. A sorcerer notices you in the treasury and teleports you to a small room where he pours a bag of gold coins on the floor, and as soon as they stop in place, the light goes out everywhere and you find yourself in complete darkness.

    And then the sorcerer’s voice tells you: "Divide the coins into two piles so that each has the same amount of tails up and then you get out of here with them." Fortunately, before the lights went out, you noticed that exactly 20 coins were tiled up. But where exactly - you did not remember. What to do? How will we get out?

    But why would it be easier if these trainees had a result by which they can be judged without wasting time on all sorts of arguments and philosophical questions? This result should be a diploma, but our education system is so doubtful that this document is absolutely not credible. You have to invent something and get up on your ears all the time.


    But you were lucky (or not), it took an experienced developer (or even a lead), and not an empty-headed trainee. How would you now evaluate it?

    Of course, according to the result he achieved earlier, he is experienced! And where can this result be found? This annals, as a rule, is a resume, supported by links to products, recommendations and entries in the workbook with seals. Yes, labor at some point is not entirely useless, but acts as a guarantor, minimizing possible cunning.

    It remains only to talk and make sure that this is the most previously achieved result by your candidate, as well as make sure that you agree on the characters.

    One can judge about such a concept as quality in different ways: to feel the completed projects yourself, see the code. Or even give a test task, if for some reason there are doubts after all the previous ones. But the main thing to remember is the ability to get the result, whether it be code or anything else, is primary.

    Agree, communicating with a mature specialist, trying to wield prerequisites and potential - at least idiotic.

    It’s like when buying a car to ignore any tests it has passed and tests, and try to find out the acceleration, the level of safety by indirect signs: the structure of the engine, suspension, color and so on.


    And now we come to the real tragedy of the market. At least in Russia. Some unknown force perverted the system and discounted the resume. Deprecated experience. Deprecated the result.

    My colleagues and I conducted an experiment by inserting a conversion counter using the links to our applications in the resume, and sending them to the company.

    Guess how many times after the initial and even secondary communication, when they offer to personally undergo a technical or even final interview, links to developed products from the resume have been opened? Once or twice. From a minimum of a dozen companies. And then, I'm not sure that these are not your own transitions.
    (counter and links work exactly, checked)

    How should a specialist feel to whom you are trying to foist a task from the series 'expand a simply connected list' without even looking at his achievements? You secretly declare: “Your experience and result are so insignificant and doubtful that we equate it to an empty place and consider you as yesterday’s student.”

    Any self-respecting maiden who can understand this, and especially an intelligible leader, just gets up and leaves. And how else can you react to disrespect for your own work?

    It’s a nightmare to see that for the vast majority of companies, a resume looks like one line with a name and photo and just a white space under it. All this subtext can be considered only as: “Yes ... you’ve done something for the last 3/5/10 years, but we are all so indifferent and too lazy to read that it’s better to pass the test for grade 11 graduates, and we will determine who we will take the position of Sinier. ”

    Further worse.

    A mysterious Russian soul is added to this obscurantism. This is when experience and the result are already discredited, then there remains only a passion for the show. Where decision-making comes from who sells best.

    The developer must sell himself. A profession where some of the best specialists are introverts should create a spectacular appearance of professionalism!

    A genius with a stutter is half as likely to get a job as a talker with a wind between his ears. And do not think that these are some third world companies. I personally watched how such sales fell into Yandex for serious development positions.

    The hiring system is deeply rotten, and this is primarily due to industry leaders. As long as Internet AvtoVAZ spread articles with a selection of tasks from the 1st year of matan under the heading 'Tasks for Interviews that Everyone Should Know' - everything will roll down with acceleration. People delve into their mouths, exacerbating the stereotype that this is normal.


    It is probably worth noting that I do not urge to silently read the resume and with awe on it to hire. You need to be on a par with the candidate and respect his experience, try to find common ground in his knowledge with your tasks and ask specific questions. In an extreme case, if doubts remain - ask to do a practical test task. But here, not everything is so linear - the task should flow from communication with the applicant, be the result of your conversation.

    If you need a sdk specialist for facebook, and the person you have never encountered, but overall makes an adequate impression, and you are worried that difficulties may arise, you can offer him to develop a demo version of the solution to the problem from this area.

    But in no case do not spit out to each applicant a template task from the first minutes of acquaintance from the series: "Make a list with pictures from Google." And then these people wonder why everyone is allergic to test items. I'm just sick of it. They have compromised a key tool for determining ability to achieve results.

    Well, the problem is clear. But why is it so important to rectify the situation?

    Because through such a hiring system successfully pass:

    • People who are in love with your company. And ready to step on the throat of their pride. And these are far from always top-class specialists; they are simply ready to bend more at the selection stage. But there are exceptions.

    • Fish climbing trees. Simply put, those who get this whole process high. Who manically prepares for an interview and believes that it is important to be able to recursively bypass the binary tree in C ++ when your job is to typeset sites.
    • Rare talented exceptions.

    Now open and see the products of such companies. Look at the application of the market, facebook, mail, mail, contact, YouTube, alpha bank, and so on and on and on. What is your impression? Are the staff they selected effective? These companies are all famous for their technical interviews.
    (I speak primarily about applications, because this is my main specialty)

    This article is a manifesto against unskilled hiring. Because I’m tired of using low-grade products of companies that crushed the entire market for themselves and can’t make their goods worthy.

    I sincerely hope that the main ships of the IT harbor will hear my scream.

    If you are a high-level specialist, boycott such companies. Now the market is severely hungry, you will always find work, even giving up a couple of tidbits. But this will make a difference for you and your colleagues. You yourself will be pleased to work with those who know how to do business.

    Perhaps, I’ll leave a joke on the topic of staff shortages in the end:

    That's all. Thank you for reading.

    Also popular now: