Re:Why we don't hire programmers based on puzzles and tricks
by codeonfire on Friday February 22, 2013 @11:44AM
(#5265141)
I ask difficult interview questions and require actual code to be written on the spot. If the questions can't be answered I let everyone know it. The viability of firing under-performing people is zero. Managers just want headcount and don't care about ability. They play the political game not the build-and-ship-software game.
Are there cost implications? I should think so since the fakers cost lots of money and are not producing any software.
Re:Why we don't hire programmers based on puzzles and tricks
by 127001brewer on Friday February 22, 2013 @12:30PM
(#5265391)
They play the political game ...
Unfortunately, this happens far too often. However, I have completely bombed on "difficult interview questions" and "code to be written" - merely due to the pressures felt in the interview(s).
As said elsewhere, identifying the "fakers" is extremely difficult - perhaps that's why people who were referred tend[0] to be more successful? (But how do people outside get in?)
[0] Merely a guesstimate based on casual observations.
Re:Why we don't hire programmers based on puzzles and tricks
by svachalek on Friday February 22, 2013 @04:38PM
(#5267029)
Many companies are terrified of being sued for firing and will resort to passive-aggressive behavior instead. Most stuff like this is settled out of court so I don't know what the real odds and risks are but anecdotally I've been in a few orgs that weren't shy about firing at all, and didn't suffer for it.
Concerning the viability of firing under-performing individuals, how likely is that? Are there any implications with indirect costs such as unemployment benefits? (I ask because I do not know - any insight on this would be greatly appreciated.)