We do this at @Yapp. Really valuable part of the process for all parties in my experience.https://twitter.com/base10/status/984620828699643905 …
-
-
I know a higher up in the Canadian government that hires a lot of really good devs. When I asked her what her secret was she said: “It’s impossible to fire here, so we always start with a 3 mo contract. Then a 1 year one. Then FT.” Same general idea.
-
I think it’s very different actually. A two hour pairing attempts to evaluate your ability to write real world code. A three month contact is evaluating whethers you can ship it.
-
3-month contract is a terrific way to evaluate fit from both sides, but it is a non-starter for many candidates who don’t want to leave their current position without a new full-time role for insurance (thanks dumb US healthcare system) or psychological safety reasons.
-
Yeah, it's not going to work for everyone, but if you can make it pretty obvious that if it works out there is a permanent position afterwards I think most people will take it on a leap of faith. But you're right—it's a different set of considerations in the US.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We find it pretty effective to really get a good grasp of their abilities (not just technical either). Also try to break the ice by pairing first on *their* passion project (or anything they want). We wanna make it as comfy as possible!
-
Pairing on their own project to break the ice? Ooooh I like this
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We do a 90-minute session as part of the
@GustoHQ hiring process. Was actually one of the key parts of the interview that sold me on Gusto. Q: What signals do you look for in the interview? What’s in the rubric? -
Dredging up an old thread, but I'm also curious how others are designing rubrics for technical exercises. Researching purely objective yes/no ("did they write a test for X?") vs qualitative ~1-5 ("did they test the most important edge cases?") scales. Or something else entirely!
-
We’ve got a 4-point based rubric where each attribute/piece of the problem gets a score based on objective performance. It ends up being a 4x5 rubric.
-
Just to make sure I understand – there are 4 categories you're scoring, and each category has 5 concrete items you're scoring inside it to generate a score for that category? Is that right?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ohh, nice! At Frontside we pair twice for an hour and a half and then we do a full day paid interview. The first pairing session is something the candidate brings, the second is something we bring, and third (all day) is client work.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yeah. You don’t really get a good sense until at least 45 minutes in.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.