Senior DevOps Engineer with 8.5+ years of experience. Otherwise an avid artist, reader, cinephile & football fan. Looking forward to connecting with everyone :)
Preparation undeniably counts but with no offense intended to anyone, I'll quote a proverb that I felt is apt here
A fool can ask more questions than seven wise men can answer.
While your approach is practical given the shortage of time, I think it's time we (as an industry) collectively revamp the interview process so that people are judged based on what they're really capable of rather than textbook assignments that hold no real world value whatsoever.
I'm a small business programmer. I love solving tough problems with Python and PHP. If you like what you're seeing, you should probably follow me here on dev.to and then checkout my blog.
Senior DevOps Engineer with 8.5+ years of experience. Otherwise an avid artist, reader, cinephile & football fan. Looking forward to connecting with everyone :)
From my limited know-how, I'd ideally ensure the candidate undergoes 2 or 3 rounds of interviews with people of the designated team and if they clear it, a panel round with all of them so that it's easy to get a fair overview of the candidate while eliminating individual bias.
The idea here would be to ask (technical concepts - general and particularly role based along with behavioral) questions.
Yes, shortage of time is a major constraint here and so is proper execution of this but even if done with 70% efficacy, I believe the new hires will be of much better quality.
I'm a small business programmer. I love solving tough problems with Python and PHP. If you like what you're seeing, you should probably follow me here on dev.to and then checkout my blog.
Thanks for sharing this, Vinay. I think the devil is in the details here. Executed well, this would probably work. Executed poorly, and it could be a time waster.
I definitely agree with the team being involved in the interview (and perhaps even giving each member a veto).
Senior DevOps Engineer with 8.5+ years of experience. Otherwise an avid artist, reader, cinephile & football fan. Looking forward to connecting with everyone :)
Glad to help Blaine! Do share your experiences if ever you put it into practice or even add something more so that the rest of us will find it useful too.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Preparation undeniably counts but with no offense intended to anyone, I'll quote a proverb that I felt is apt here
While your approach is practical given the shortage of time, I think it's time we (as an industry) collectively revamp the interview process so that people are judged based on what they're really capable of rather than textbook assignments that hold no real world value whatsoever.
Agreed. How do we do it? What would a better process look like?
From my limited know-how, I'd ideally ensure the candidate undergoes 2 or 3 rounds of interviews with people of the designated team and if they clear it, a panel round with all of them so that it's easy to get a fair overview of the candidate while eliminating individual bias.
The idea here would be to ask (technical concepts - general and particularly role based along with behavioral) questions.
Yes, shortage of time is a major constraint here and so is proper execution of this but even if done with 70% efficacy, I believe the new hires will be of much better quality.
Thanks for sharing this, Vinay. I think the devil is in the details here. Executed well, this would probably work. Executed poorly, and it could be a time waster.
I definitely agree with the team being involved in the interview (and perhaps even giving each member a veto).
Glad to help Blaine! Do share your experiences if ever you put it into practice or even add something more so that the rest of us will find it useful too.