Discrediting specialists or modern interviews

Imagine that you are an IT company. Maybe a lot or not, but it turned out 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 - the interns are animals that do not have the skills. And they did nothing useful before. How not to make a mistake in choosing? Well, it's pretty simple. If it is impossible to evaluate by the result, then one should look for prerequisites for achieving this result ...

An article about the serious problem of recruiting, which for some reason everyone thinks is the norm

Newbies

The prerequisites for achieving results are different. For example, a sharp mind. Naturally, an important factor, but not the only one. The world knows many talented lazy people who ingeniously parasitize on the sofa.
')
Then we still need a certain character warehouse, this is true.

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

And if to identify the inclinations of character there is a wide range of practices that only conditionally relate to IT, then finding 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 look at how a person speaks and thinks.

We give some abstract task and ask to solve it, following the train of thought. But we are not too fond of mathematics, because we lose the point about the reasoning. Unusual logical problem perfectly fit into these criteria.


But why would it be easier if these interns 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 dubious that this document is absolutely not credible. It is necessary all the time to invent something and stand on the ears.

Smart

But here you are lucky (or not), you need an experienced developer (or even a lead), and not an empty-headed intern. How would you now evaluate it?

Of course, according to the result he achieved earlier, because he is experienced! And where can this result be found? This chronicle, as a rule, is a summary, supported by references to products, recommendations and employment records with seals. Yes, labor at some point is not entirely useless, but acts as a guarantor, reducing the possible slyness to a minimum.

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

One can judge about such a concept as quality in different ways: to feel realized projects yourself, see the code. Or even give a test task, if for some reason there are doubts after all the preceding. But the main thing that needs to be remembered is the ability to get the result, whether it is 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 and tests that have been passed, and try to figure out overclocking, the level of security according to circumstantial signs: engine structure, suspension, color, and so on.

Problem

And here we come to the real tragedy of the market. At least in Russia. Some unknown force perverted the system and devalued the resume. Devalued experience. Discounted the result.

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

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

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

Any self-respecting virgins who can understand this, and especially a distinct leader, will just get up and leave. And how else can you respond to disrespect for your own work?

It's terrible to see that for an overwhelming number of companies, a resume looks like one line with a name and a photo and just a white space under it. All this subtext can only be viewed as: “Yes ... you have done something for the last 3/5/10 years, but we are all so indifferent and too lazy to read that it is better to pass a test for graduates of the 11th grade, and we will determine by whom we will take the cinera position. "

Further worse.

To this obscurantism is added a mysterious Russian soul. This is when experience and results are already discredited, then only passion for the show remains. Where the decision comes from who will sell himself better.

The developer has to sell himself. Profession, where some of the best specialists are introverts, should create a spectacular appearance of professionalism!

A genius with a stutter is twice less likely to get a position than a windbag with a wind between his ears. And do not think that these are some third world companies. I personally watched how these were sold into Yandex for serious development positions.

The hiring system is deeply rotten, and first of all this is facilitated by industry leaders. As long as the Internet AvtoVAZ spread articles with the selection of tasks from the 1st course of matan under the heading 'Tasks for interviews that everyone should know' - everything will roll down with acceleration. The people penetrate the mouth, exacerbating the stereotype that this is normal.

Decision

It is probably worth noting that I do not urge to read the resume silently and to recruit it with trepidation. You need to be on the same level with the candidate and respect his experience, try to find common ground in his knowledge with your tasks and ask specific questions. As a last resort, if there are doubts, ask for a practical test assignment. But here, not everything is so linear - the task should flow out of communication with the applicant, be the result of your conversation.

If you need a sdk specialist for facebook and have never encountered an interlocutor, but in general makes an adequate impression and you are worried that difficulties may arise, then you can suggest that he develop a demonstration solution to the problem from this area.

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

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

Because through such a system of hiring successfully pass:

• People who are in love with your company. And ready to step on the throat of their pride. And these are not always top class specialists, they are just ready to bend more at the selection stage. But there are exceptions.
  
  
  
• Tree Climbing Fish Simply put, those who have this whole process are high. Whoever manically prepares for an interview and believes that it is important to be able to recursively bypass a binary tree in C ++, when your job is in the layout of sites.
• Rare talented exceptions.

And now open and see the products of such companies. See the application of the market, Facebook, mail mail, contact, YouTube, alpha bank, and so on, and on and on. How is the impression? Is the staff they picked up effective? These companies are all renowned for their technical interviews.
(I’m talking primarily about applications, because this is my main specialty)

This article is a manifesto against unqualified recruitment. Because I am tired of using low-grade products of companies that have crushed the entire market and cannot make their goods worthy.

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

If you are a high level specialist, boycott such companies. Now the market hunger, you will always find a job, even giving up a couple of tidbits. But it will change the situation for the better for you and your colleagues. You yourself will be pleased to work with those who know how to do business.

Perhaps, leave a joke on the topic of personnel hunger in the end:



It's all. Thank you for reading.