motiejus/jakstys.lt
1
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity

thanks Anton for your feedback

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Motiejus Jakštys 2022-06-23 13:58:42 +03:00
parent 75cf2be3d4
commit 27550a456a
1 changed files with 69 additions and 31 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

100
content/log/2022/big-tech-hiring.md
View File

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
---
title: "In Defense Of Big Tech Hiring"
date: 2022-06-19T12:44:16+03:00
date: 2022-06-23T13:45:00+03:00
slug: big-tech-hiring
draft: true
---
@ -12,28 +12,39 @@ processes. If you have not heard, these are good introductory posts:
- [Dan Luu — We only hire the trendiest (2016)][danluu-trendiest].
- [Thomas Ptacek — The Hiring Post (2015)][tptacek-hiring-post].
I will be conducting an [Uber Mock Interview][uber-mock-interview] later this
month. I meant to write about seemingly broken BigTech interviews for a while
now, but this event offered me a concrete deadline. I feel like I have to
explain to myself why I am doing an interview at all, and why I am OK with the
format we are planning to use. In this post I will:
The gist of the posts above is:
- BigTech hiring process is pretty much the same across BigTech. It is
explained in this post, even, in detail. Therefore, the companies are
applying the same criteria, and thus fighting for the same candidates: the
candidates that do well in these particular interviews, but not necessarily
at the job.
- Because the filter is the same, it does not encourage diversity in candidate
background.
- The interview process, and especially the problems, are not representative to
what the dayjob will require. Some links above offer alternative methods of
interviewing.
Why am I writing about this? I will be conducting an [Uber Mock
Interview][uber-mock-interview] later this month. I meant to write about
seemingly broken BigTech interviews for a while now, but this event offered me
a concrete deadline. I feel like I have to explain to myself why I am doing an
interview at all, and why I am OK with the format we are planning to use. In
this post I will:
- Walk through the "standard" interview process of a Big Tech. [I've worked at
two]({{< ref "resume" >}} "Resume Page"), the process is very similar; will
shamelessly extrapolate for "most others". (This matches the experience of my
friends whom I have surveyed.)
- Explain some reasons why *I think* the interviews are done the way they are,
and why we reasonably expect them to work, despite of all the negatives we
keep reading about all the time.
- Understand/recap the interview process of Big Techs. [I've worked at two]({{<
ref "resume" >}} "Resume"), the process is very similar; will shamelessly
extrapolate for "most others".
and why we reasonably expect them to work, despite the negatives.
- Talk about the limitations/caveats of the process, along with mitigations how
to work around them.
- Hopefully refute some of the popular beliefs that hiring process in big tech
companies "is incredibly stupid". Yes, I have heard this multiple times.
we can work around them.
Usual disclaimer: this is my personal opinion and this blog is not affiliated
with my employer in any way.
Jump to the bottom for the [TLDR](#tldr-is-this-stupid-or-not).
Jump to the bottom for the [conclusion](#tldr-so-does-it-work).
## The standard interview process
## Trade-offs of the standard interview process
This is how a standard[^1] interview loop in the big techs I've worked so far
at looked/looks like:
@ -49,19 +60,32 @@ at looked/looks like:
4. All participants above: Debrief, where hire/no-hire decision is made:
30-60m++.
I will be focusing on the parts of the process where qualified, bright, but not
"interview primed" candidates may be rejected. Thomas Ptacek
[states][tptacek-hiring-post] writes:
Such process somewhat works for the BigTech and individuals. The primary goals
of the BigTech seems to be:
- Apply a consistent filter and make sure candidates are evaluated fairly.
- Get the best candidates for the environment.
- Fit into the constraints. E.g. it makes sense to invest only X amount of
hours to interview each candidate, given their acceptance rate is Y%.
We, as engineers, have our goals. Usually they are:
- BigTech benefits. (Will not enumerate them here, but I will buy you a coffee
and tell you in person if you want to know more.)
- Long interview process: it takes time and energy. Lots of energy. Like
everything that takes time, energy and is stressful, we want to get it over
with quickly.
I will be focusing mostly on the "consistent filter" and the "stress/energy"
part. About which Thomas Ptacek [states][tptacek-hiring-post]:
> The majority of people who can code can’t do it well in an interview.
Well, let's see how the his words hold. But first let's drill into the process.
Well, let's see how this holds. But first let's drill into the process.
### Recruiter: CV screen
CV screen is conducted by a recruiter in the HR department: I do not take part
in this, therefore I have no visibility into rejected candidates. To the
recruiters’ credit, juding from the resumes I’ve seen during phone screens, we
recruiters’ credit, judging from the resumes I've seen during phone screens, we
interview folks with diverse backgrounds, even with a minimal "match." For
example, a physicist major with data analysis background in Python is unusual,
but not very surprising: they do get a fair chance at the phone screen.
@ -263,20 +287,33 @@ If you are not a good team player, that will likely be determined during this
or the Hiring Manager's interview. That may be OK depending on the position;
but more often than not, this is a red flag.
## TLDR: is this stupid or not?
## TLDR: so does it work?
I do not think the BigTech hiring process is stupid. I can see legitimate
reasons behind every part of the interview. When the candidate knows what to
look for, they can prepare for it; which I think is totally fair.
Given the BigTech constraints, the interview process does what it's meant for.
It is not perfect: it sometimes leads to non-diverse candidates, folks trained
for the interviews but not the job, companies fighting for the same population.
However, it does fit the company constraints, and, in my experience, the result
is pretty damn good.
To sum up:
Does it work for us, though? Not always, because:
- Some may not be willing to invest that much time into job hunt. Well, that's
on the candidate. Do it, it's worth it.
- The interview part, especially the full "on-site", is extremely stressful. It
is what it is and that is unlikely to change any time soon. But it can be
mitigated, as explained earlier.
If you are rejected or are too stressed for a BigTech interview, but still want
to work there:
- If you know someone at the company you want to apply to, ask for a referral.
You can always ask me[^3] (contact details are prominent in this blog).
For example, you can [ask me]({{< ref "contact" >}} "Contact Page")[^3].
- Do some puzzles before the interviews. This is an investment that will pay
off; just like spending some time to [learn to
negotiate][salary-negotiation].
- If you fail, the recruiter usually tells why. Prepare for that and do not
hesitate to re-apply in 6-12 months.
- If you fail, the recruiter usually tells why. Ask them when you can re-apply.
If you didn't ask, the usual "wait time" is 6-12 months.
Hopefully you work, or will soon, in a job that suits you best. Regardless if
it's a BigTech or not, good luck!
# Addendum: a mock interview
@ -306,7 +343,8 @@ curious, you have one shot to attend live.
P.S. The candidates can use any programming language during the interview. Make
a wild guess which I will pick.
Many thanks to Abhinav Gupta and Tim Miller for reading drafts of this.
Many thanks to Abhinav Gupta, Tim Miller and Anton Lavrik for reading drafts of
this.
[danluu-talent]: https://danluu.com/talent/
[danluu-hiring-lemons]: https://danluu.com/hiring-lemons/
@ -322,4 +360,4 @@ Many thanks to Abhinav Gupta and Tim Miller for reading drafts of this.
[^3]: If you want to work where I work (company + location), feel free to ask
me for a referral. Keep in mind, though, that I will spend some time to
understand whether I believe you are a good fit. See the post for my
criteria.
criteria. I will also buy you a coffee. Seriously; all you need to do is ask.