The current system of job seeking often requires to lie on resume. It is even being highly recommended by people that coach people for job seeking, although with some moderation of course.
The current system of job seeking often requires to lie on resume. It is even being highly recommended by people that coach people for job seeking, although with some moderation of course.
Yes, I hire programmers. I need core competencies in areas I care about. If the job is Java but you’ve mostly been working in C# I’ll take it on faith that you can figure that part out yourself.
If you tell me you’ve worked on ecommerce sites but can’t tell me the steps of a credit card transaction, I’m concerned.
What I really care about is your ability to articulate your answers, clearly enumerate assumptions underlying your reasoning, and so on. If I have to pull teeth to get answers, I’m not hiring you. I’m an introvert, I used to love being left alone to write code in a dingy basement office, so I get that attitude but you need to be able to talk to people to get a job.
Part of that interaction is proving you have an understanding of the tools you will be using. If you lied about that knowledge and understanding, it will be painfully obvious very quickly.
I interviewed a guy who claimed on his resume that he ported a Blizzard game from PC to mobile. The way it was worded heavily implied that he worked for a company that was contracted by Blizzard to port the game, or at least that this was an official project in some sense, like maybe he worked with a group on the internet to do as a passion project, like how people reverse engineer and make open source versions of games.
Not only was it a school thing, it wasn’t even like a project that he did. It was an example that his teacher went over in class.
He didn’t know a single thing that was on his own resume. But he got the job anyway, even though we never did a technical interview for him. Guess whose daughter was his girlfriend? Yup, the VP of software.
Yeah that’s a better way to put it to me. I honestly don’t care what language most people code in, but I hope you can explain how you’re doing stuff. I interview with the expectation of “a lot of red squigglies” expecting it not to compile. I don’t care if you call .Sort instead of writing your own. Just show me you can code.
Sadly though, my latest question is for web developers and is mostly made up of calling a simple GET api. I have failed at least 80% of the engineers that take that test simply because they have no idea how to call an API in any language or framework, something I do I’d say on a daily basis. It’s basically “call a fake endpoint /foo and show the results” and that takes mid level engineers the entire hour to do.
We just overhauled a programming test we use of we aren’t certain a person can do what they say they can do (which is most of the time when you hire remote) and yeah the old one disqualified tons of people. It was very simple. I have had lots of people have someone else do it and then act very surprised when I wanted to discuss it with them.
Exact same problems, especially remote. I honestly don’t know what is happening with engineers coming out of school/bootcamps, they just legit cannot code but go for these coding jobs. who is hiring them? I remember making fun of “fizzbuzz” as an interview question because it’s too easy but I legit have had people fail fizzbuzz! In languages they chose!
I hate technical interviews, I’ve been given questions like “implement binary search”, like okay, I can do that, but this is an annoying question. So I try to keep mine very light, “let’s just chat about code, show me you can do basic stuff”, and I’m just constantly disappointed.
People are taking an hour for
import requests res = requests.get("https://your-domain.com/foo") print(res.json())
or javascript’s fetch that I don’t want to type on my phone any more code for? Maybe I should think higher of my skills.
There’s a bit more to it, my question I mean, but I shit you not more interviewees I’ve had have failed what you just wrote than succeeded.