←back to thread

56 points mooreds | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
StopDisinfo910 ◴[] No.45413466[source]
In my experience, technical interviews are not really useful past the very basic "Can this candidate actually write a conditional and has the slightest clue about programming?". Ability to solve hard leetcode-like problems under time pressure in a stressful environment doesn't meaningfully translate to "will be a great contributor to the team work on the kind of problem we have".

Our best hires are nearly always coming from the network of a team member or people we contracted with and decided to hire full time.

Most of my time in interview nowadays is spent understanding what the candidate has done before, explaining to them what we do and asking open questions to see how they would approach our issues and how they link them to their experience. If it seems to fit, we hire. My country standard contract offers a fairly long probation period for new hire and we don't hesite about parting with people when it's not working after a quarter. We are very explicit about this policy.

replies(2): >>45413623 #>>45413831 #
1. atoav ◴[] No.45413831[source]
I find problem-solving questions always pretty good at weeding out candidates. Give them a real world problem with a fictional situation from their future job and just ask how they would tackle the problem.