Timeline for Testing as part of the interview process
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2019 at 2:49 | comment | added | Daniel | @IDrinkandIKnowThings, "Personally I dislike the unbeatable test because I think it sets a bad tone for the relationship. I prefer that candidates come on board with a positive experience of success rather than failure but that is my preference." Totally agree, I wish more people in the tech field understood that. This whole need to haze or outsmart the candidate is rather pointless and disrespectful. | |
| Jul 11, 2012 at 2:29 | history | bounty ended | MathAttack | ||
| Jul 11, 2012 at 2:29 | vote | accept | MathAttack | ||
| Jul 10, 2012 at 0:52 | comment | added | MathAttack | @Angelo - I like both your points. There's nothing that's 100% objective... The goal is just to control for bias as much as possible. Certainly giving the test to current employees is good for calibration, though one has to be careful there too... (You don't want to test 100% for things just specific to your firm, or you miss good candidates) | |
| Jul 8, 2012 at 18:15 | comment | added | Angelo | @MathAttack, I don't think you can ever truly expect to evaluate candidates totally "objectively". Evaluation of fit and potential for job performance requires a strong component of subjectivity (and there's nothing wrong with that). However, I think if you do come up with a test written or otherwise, it would be a good idea to apply the test on current employees to see how your top-performers score and compare that to the candidates. | |
| Jul 8, 2012 at 13:08 | comment | added | Spoike | @Chad: Yeah, you wrote "former" but meant "latter" which made it confusing. Sorry to nitpick, edit ok! | |
| Jul 8, 2012 at 13:00 | history | edited | IDrinkandIKnowThings | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarified which test I disapproved of
|
| Jul 8, 2012 at 8:57 | comment | added | Spoike | @Chad: Could you please explain what you mean with you disliking FizzBuzz but at the same time prefer that they come on board with a positive experience of success. The Kobayashi Maru test is a test of character in an experience of failure (no-win scenario). You might need to edit that. ;-) | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 14:01 | comment | added | IDrinkandIKnowThings | @MathAttack - No it is an important tool. Just not a silver bullet. There is a reason that the 4 phase process is popular... it is more successful than many alternatives. That said each company has its own implementation. It is an imperfect process because people are imperfect. Define your process and tweak it till your find a mix that works for you. | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 13:53 | comment | added | MathAttack | @Chad - Would you eliminate it completely as part of an interview process? For example - let's say we have the behavioral and cultural pieces in place at a firm that requires a lot of content knowledge. (Content could be programming C, or Accounting rules, or whatever) Rather than have a biased interview, why not put in formal tests? I've only seen this at a few places, hence my questions for the whole group. | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 12:26 | comment | added | IDrinkandIKnowThings | @MathAttack - As I said im my answer I do not think you can adequately evaluate a candidate with just a test. I think a test is an important part of the process but if you rely on the results of tests then you end up with a company full of good test takers... that does not always translate to good workers, and certianly not to "the best possible staff". | |
| Jul 5, 2012 at 21:14 | comment | added | MathAttack | @Chad - Anything more specific on how to efficiently and objectively test skills? (If not FizzBuzz or Kobayashi Maru - then what? And is a written exam ever a useful component?) | |
| Jul 5, 2012 at 7:52 | comment | added | pdr | I tend to switch the last two, because people who pass the team-fit test rarely then fail on a technical test, while the reverse is more likely. Also, a non-technical interview is a better opportunity to hook them in and convince them that they want the job. Good answer, nonetheless. | |
| Jul 2, 2012 at 18:47 | history | edited | IDrinkandIKnowThings | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 characters in body
|
| Jul 2, 2012 at 14:49 | history | answered | IDrinkandIKnowThings | CC BY-SA 3.0 |