Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

_learning_to_learn t1_issvbdy wrote

I completely understand your frustration having gone through the same. But looking at the positive side, you were saved from a group of people who prioritise memorising docs and single line solutions instead of the approach and conceptual understanding.

There are few companies/start-ups who aren't experienced with recruitment and make such rookie mistakes. But there are so a lot of great places which actually evaluate your understanding and approach to a given problem.

901

artsybashev t1_ist6rs2 wrote

I felt good after getting in one of these companies. I'm still enlisted there but I never landed a customer gig there since they were not interested in paying what I'm used to (I can put my own price on their portal). I've had a couple of customer interviews during the 3 years but I've been more successful finding my own customers.

The interview was definitely not the best experience but not the worst either. It does measure your knowledge of some of the common tools used in the industry and puts emphasis in the most common tools.

Consulting companies usually wants to produce value for the customer as fast as possible without thinking too much if the details. This might push them towards their method of choosing who to hire.

43

DorianGre t1_isw2dip wrote

I reject one liners in pull requests in any language that combine more than 3 functions. Its not maintainable.

22

Ulfgardleo t1_iswx9zs wrote

(a+b-c)/(d+e)

4 function calls in numpy.

5

DorianGre t1_isxufxh wrote

Don’t be pedantic. You understood what I meant.

12

Apprehensive-Grade81 t1_isswkoj wrote

Any tips on what companies/startups we should be looking into? I’m new in the space and am still navigating the interview process.

14

_learning_to_learn t1_issz842 wrote

The first step would be to be clear on what you expect from the company you're applying to. Once you have that clarity, the next step would be to evaluate what a company has to offer you and how it fits into your career plan.

Based on my experience, before applying to start-ups, it's always good to talk to their current and past employees, look at the history of the founders and study the product they are building and their customers.

21

Appropriate_Ant_4629 t1_ist71um wrote

> talk to their current and past employees

That's brilliant.

From now on I'm going to ask employers for a list of references of past employees I can contact.

30

cyancynic t1_ist9bp6 wrote

Glassdoor can be useful sometimes

14

Appropriate_Ant_4629 t1_isth0b4 wrote

Sure.

But if the employer actually can (and is willing to) provide references of happy past employees, it says a lot about their culture.

They sometimes will asks candidates for references from their previous employers - so it's only fair for them to do the same.

8

fernandodandrea t1_isuwhpc wrote

I wouldn't want a previous employer giving my contact information like this.

15

Appropriate_Ant_4629 t1_isvnwbh wrote

> I wouldn't want a previous employer giving my contact information like this.

Which says something about that employer too.

There are some of my previous employers where I'd be happy to be a reference. Others that I wouldn't want to.

3

TrueBirch t1_iswykvd wrote

It's a common practice to offer departing employees money in exchange for signing an agreement not to criticize the company. My employer does this.

2

Apprehensive-Grade81 t1_ist21ac wrote

I get that. I have trouble approaching a company with that mindset, though. Often I’ll I end up taking whatever they give without any pushback because I am too worried about coming off negatively and hurting my chances during the interview.

I’m sure a lot of this is anxiety/imposter syndrome from entering a new industry, but it’s hard to convince myself of that in the moment.

4

Ataru074 t1_ist8z4p wrote

But that’s on you, not on them. Imposter syndrome is real and hard to shake off… but keep in mind that large employers are much better at selecting personnel than small companies. So, maybe it’s time to step up the game and go for the big ass corporations.

8

Apprehensive-Grade81 t1_istbg1b wrote

100% agree with you. I actually came from the startup space and am quite comfortable there, but I’ve been going for larger corporations because I want to make sure I hit a standard that can assess my abilities on the market today.

I didn’t mean to come off as either whiny or as a victim of the interview process. I was just acknowledging that there is a roadblock in doing what I know is needed, but I also know that’s 100% on me. I know it’ll get better with time as well as it’s a growth period for me, which is moving outside of a comfort zone and enduring some painful experiences- but these are the good pains associated with growth.

I appreciate your advice, though. My mentor gives me the same talk, so at least I know I’m in good company (he’s just insanely brilliant, so I’m lucky to have him helping me along as well).

5

Ataru074 t1_istbyrf wrote

I recommend anyone to go work for a while for the big dogs. That gives you a much better perspective in your professional life.

I mean, if you can get a job in a F100 corp, do it, see if you like it, and then have the peace of mind that if you are good enough for one of the largest corporation on the planet, you should be plenty good for pretentious small shit.

9

rstjohn t1_iswxhvk wrote

Not quite the same thing. People who do well in big companies aren't always cut out for startup work and vice versa.

1

Ataru074 t1_isx0dq8 wrote

Absolutely true. With a catch… a startup can be a rollercoaster for your own self esteem, a large corp is a gauge.

1

Jurph t1_isxlxf9 wrote

> prioritise memorising docs and single line solutions

This is actually toxic to long-term best practices for a business whose intellectual property is stored as source code. Source code is for humans to read, and so one-lining it into a very clever but obscure invocation is costly in two ways: it costs the writer time & effort to "compress" it, and then it costs every maintainer time & effort to "decompress" it. Five well-commented lines of code that have clear variable names are superior -- from a business case, and a security case -- than one line. In most scripting languages those one-liners compile (hand-wave, whatever) to the same machine code as the five good lines, so there's typically no performance difference.

> claims they hire the top 3%

They hire 3% of candidates, so obviously it's the top 3%, and not an arbitrary slice of the candidate pool filtered by their bogus biases, right? I'm a hiring manager and this interview process sounds totally garbage. I suspect they have no data that correlate their interview process to productivity on the job.

2