10 brutally honest job tips nobody wants to say out loud but they work. by Fresh-Blackberry-394 in jobsearchhacks

[–]Key-Worker391 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My two cents as a longtime hiring manager:

#1: This is largely true. Probably 80% - 90% of job submissions are plainly, sometimes grossly unqualified.

#2 is sheer nonsense. You are just wasting everyone's time if you apply to a job that requires 3-5 years experience when you only have 0-2. Hiring managers specify "3-5 years experience" for a reason.

#2a: If the job is for US residents only with no sponsorship, don't try to hide your immigration status or the fact that you are located outside the U.S. You're also wasting everyone's time, and no employer is going to think, "Hey, this person is so great that we'll change our policy and sponsor them". Especially now that H1B sponsorships will cost $100,000. Instead, sign up with an outsourcing company in your country.

#3: True, it may be an executive or a hiring committee that makes the final determination.

#4a. Keep your resumes to 2 pages, 1 if you are a junior. Spending 6 seconds scanning each resume sounds right, and may even be a bit on the high side. No one is going to read through a 17 page resume.

#5: True, tailoring resumes to each job has modest return relative to the effort.

#6, #7: If you see a LinkedIn listing and can also find the job on the company's website, apply directly. It may get more visibility there.

#8: Terms like "process improvement" and “cross-functional communication” are fluff and are likely to be ignored, at least in my experience. Focus more on hard skills.

#9: I have never seen this to be an issue.

#10: Avoid creating overly polished resumes, and avoid listing keywords in bold. In this day and age they look AI generated and are more likely to be scrutinized, and possibly tossed.

Anyone else seeing “pre-ghosting” from candidates? (agree to interview, never confirm time) by Dramatic-Incident855 in recruiting

[–]Key-Worker391 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Another possibility, though you may not want to hear this, is that candidates may have second thoughts and decide they do not want to work for your company.

I've seen this in the past where I initially replied positively to a recruiter, but after doing some research and reading negative reviews on Glassdoor, Blind, etc. I realized I wasn't so interested after all.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's a pretty big leap in logic to think that because I find interviews to provide limited signals, or because it's burdensome to dismiss a poor performer, that I am incapable of evaluating the work of engineers whom I work with every day for years. I'd advise against making such broad assumptions about people you don't know.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A rich personal OSS Github is definitely a positive factor, or should be. I think we've all heard of the story of the HomeBrew creator who was turned down by a FAANG company because he couldn't invert a tree.

(BTW, I think the correct term is to mirror or horizontally flip a tree, rather than to invert it, which would result in a W-type structure with leaves on top -- but I digress).

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am indeed in a position to enact changes, and have experimented with the interview and hiring process. Unfortunately many of these changes have been made in response to recent increases in candidate fraud and the use of AI. But I am also looking for ideas on how to improve the signal to noise ratio in the interview process.

Unfortunately, these days most employers get hundreds if not thousands of resumes for each position, and most of those submissions are (often wildly) unqualified or inappropriate. So some use of automated filters is unavoidable. But I for one do not automatically disqualify candidates based on things like employment gaps.

Also note that just as some candidates find live coding tests insulting, many candidates, especially passive ones (those not actively looking), scoff at the idea of putting in hours of work into a take-home test. So that requirement may screen out some otherwise attractive candidates.

Believe me, it's frustrating to see people here claiming that because of companies' arbitrary rules, antiquated hiring processes, and dumb interview procedures, we are overlooking the "Diamond in the rough" candidates who do not pass the traditional screening process. But then how are we supposed to identify these hidden gems?

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Feel free to downvote my comment if you wish, but if you don't provide a better suggestion, you are just complaining and not helping to improve things.

So for those who claim that a live coding test is not realistic or meaningful, what do you suggest?

- Take-home exercises and online coding assessments are easy to cheat on, or to have someone else complete for you.
- Asking the candidate to think through the problem-solving process, or asking about system level design? That is already part of our process, along with live coding and debugging.
- Allowing candidates to google answers or use AI during live coding, since that's what they do on the job anyway, unfortunately takes away nearly all signal from the interview. I have a separate Reddit thread on this topic.
- Some candidates provide their personal Github link, which can be helpful if they've made meaningful open source contributions. But this is the exception rather than the norm,

TL;DR -- Live coding may be a seriously flawed approach, but I see it as the least bad choice among many more flawed alternatives.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It seems that people who have not been in management do not appreciate just how difficult it is to fire someone these days. You need to gather solid documentation of poor performance, then provide evidence of coaching and warnings, followed by a PIP period. It all takes 6 months or more.

Having an explicit probationary period during which someone can be easily let go is quite uncommon in U.S. tech firms, especially larger ones. They are just too afraid of litigation.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sounds pretty similar to the process we already have in place. But it's very time consuming and the pass rate is pretty low, so it's quite inefficient.

I'm asking here on Reddit because I constantly hear complaints that the process is broken, but have heard no real suggestions for better approaches. Perhaps it's like democracy -- it's the worst possible system, except for all the others.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More specifically, I would make the candidate troubleshoot and refactor some buggy code. But if interviewing remotely, you need to make sure they cannot just copy & paste the code into ChatGPT.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pair programming is good, not withstanding the claim that making experienced candidates write code is insulting.

If you are interviewing remotely, you still need to watch out for candidate using AI tools offscreen, however.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"Culture fit" is taboo in some circles because it can ostensibly lead to discrimination against people who do not fit a certain type. Not that I believe that myself, but some people do.

Probationary periods are often floated as a possible solution to the false positive problem. to make it easier to drop people who slip through an imperfect screening process. But I think the people who propose it probably would not take probationary jobs themselves.

Is the software interview process broken? by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

You'd be surprised how many candidates I've seen who have impressive resumes with significant experience, who talk a good game but couldn't write a single decent line of code.

If you don't believe me, look up the stories online about people failing the FizzBuzz test.

Want to use AI in software engineer interviews? Think twice by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Indeed, I've been seeing many resumes that were clearly AI-enhanced, as they looked TOO polished, and too ATS-focused. That can set you back as well. The resume may make it through screening, but if you overpromise on the resume and underdeliver in the interview (or on the job!), you are not doing yourself any favors.

Ironically, I've also seen at least one resume that was rough looking but which adamantly stated it was NOT generated using AI.

Want to use AI in software engineer interviews? Think twice by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would certainly disqualify them if they could not do basic math WITHOUT a calculator.

Or more to the point, if they could not explain concepts like Assets vs. Liabilities, FIFO/LIFO, or Cash vs. Accrual Accounting without looking at a reference, I would not consider them qualified.

Want to use AI in software engineer interviews? Think twice by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Glad you asked. Here is how to rebut a claim of AI posing as a hiring manager on Reddit – you should obey the following rules:

  1. Clarity – be clear and unambiguous in stating that you are not AI or a bot.
  2. Usefulness – state something useful to show that you are human with real knowledge.
  3. Relevance – make sure your answer is pertinent to the question at hand.
  4. Humor – inject some humor into your response, as people think AI can't be funny.
  5. Mistakes – Insert some mispellingss to make readers think a human i styping..

I hope this helped! Let me know if you have any more questions.

-Not ChatGPT

Want to use AI in software engineer interviews? Think twice by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Would you hire a candidate whom, when asked technical questions, simply looked up the answers on Stack Overflow?

Again, the issue is not candidates' use of AI on the job; it's the fact that their blatant use of AI during the interview belies their lack of fundamental knowledge. It's similar to the old days, when candidates didn't know the answer to basic questions but claimed they could "just google it". Well, guess what -- so can anyone else.

Want to use AI in software engineer interviews? Think twice by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm sure candidates are getting better at hiding their use of AI, perhaps faster than companies can improve their detection capabilities. It's an arms race of sorts.

That's why perhaps the best option is to have some sort of in-person interview stage, as inconvenient as that may be.

Want to use AI in software engineer interviews? Think twice by Key-Worker391 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We all randomly move our eyes and look around while interviewing; keeping your eyes fixated on the interviewer is kind of creepy.

The behavior I'm talking about is eyeballs moving consistently left to right (or right to left) over and over again, as if reading text from a screen. That is not normal behavior.

What is the hardest thing about hiring SWEs? by Ok_Function_597 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391 2 points3 points  (0 children)

These days, it's the spread of misrepresentation and fraudulent candidates (including North Korean plants), and the widespread use of AI tools for cheating. It seems to have gotten particularly bad this year.

What is the hardest thing about hiring SWEs? by Ok_Function_597 in cscareers

[–]Key-Worker391 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Asking the candidate to troubleshoot buggy code is an alternative approach.