I had a single phone interview with someone at Northwestern (a long time ago) where they were looking for someone to build a pen of developers to "partner" with MBA students to turn ideas into apps. I laughed so hard my sides hurt.
I think if we'd survived there would have come a day when we got a letter from somebody's lawyer. But as a kid who grew up below the poverty level, the idea of an epic escape remains near and dear to my heart. I've probably seen it 50x.
Computer programming back then was a great way for a kid to escape to a middle class livelihood, just based on getting machine access somehow, and what they could learn on their own.
(It seemed to change, after the dotcom boom, when the jobs turned into a lot more money that attracted a lot more people, and class barriers were erected to many of the better jobs. There's still a chance for upward mobility, despite artificial class barriers, but people will tend to burn their energy mimicking the shibboleths and practicing for the hazing rituals, rather than on things that would attract and teach them. Which brings us back to this application domain, of helping companies to hire people who would be great software developers.)
The way I remember it, the general experience was that companies reached out to us and were very excited by the idea, but when we actually sent a candidate, they scotched it. I did make exactly one placement where I waived the fee (because friends). They were super happy with him but it was too little, too late.
Invisible, forgotten third partner here... more made it through all of them than you might think. They even set up their own Slack community to help each other out.
Do you remember any rough numbers on started vs finished on the two CTF tracks y'all put up?
FYI, the six stockfighter challenges were some of the most fun I ever had hacking around. I enjoy puzzle games like Exit and happily spend money on them. I would probably have paid to play the starfighter challenges even though the embedded one wasn't particularly my cup of tea. I wonder how many other nuts like me might have happily paid a monthly subscription for a few releases per year . . .
I also remember you saying in an early thread that clients' hiring processes were a mess and I think implied most treated Starfighter as just another candidate funnel. Did any of your clients take up a challenge/CTF process after working with Starfighter?
I know Thomas says hiring with challenges/CTFs is a competitive advantage but I'm not so sure. If it was true, wouldn't we see more of it out in the real world?
No, we never really got far enough that we were able to collect that kind of data. I'm glad it was fun; certainly doing it for a living is entertaining. Mostly.
IMO, the messiness of hiring processes and the lack of adoption of work sample testing have a lot to do with each other. One of the questions I regularly ask in interviews (and have for a long time) is, "What are the first 5 things you'll have me work on?" During the last round of interviews, no one I talked to could answer that. I even had a couple of interviewers who didn't even know the name of the hiring manager or the position. Then you have other artificial filters like preferred certifications where the assumption seems to be that whatever training was required to pass can be mapped onto every organisation... or that simply possessing a cert magically grants insight into how most companies do stuff. The point is that companies don't really seem to have a good idea of what they're actually hiring for, but they get by hiring more senior people who have enough experience (hopefully) that they can figure it out on their own.
One of the things we discussed early on was avoiding having Starfighter turn into a certification process and maybe that's one of the reasons why we stumbled around a bit. I am aware that certifications have their place, but they're not really a substitute for industry experience and they definitely aren't a guarantee that a candidate can quickly figure out how a company's tech is glued together. IMO that's the power of work sample testing: you're giving a candidate a challenge where they can demonstrate aptitude. But if you don't know what actually needs to be done, you can't create that challenge, much less a rubric for describing expectations.
Yes to "existing bad hiring pipelines." In at least one case, the in-house recruiter was obviously offended that she had to speak to us at all. The one placement we made was with an old pal and I had to yell at him to even give the guy a chance. Six months after we'd shuttered for good, he contacted me to ask me if I had any more Bens. Nope.
Attracting entry level hires is part of the point, but the problem remains that most companies lack the resources and/or desire to train entry level hires. Heck, most of the ones I've worked for didn't really train me at a senior level. But definitely yes on the personal issues.
I left a job in 2007. Things were so stacked against me that I had no choice but to leave. Two years later, the manager contacted me to apologise. He told me that they'd had to hire five people to replace me because they could not find one person who could do everything I could do. He said, "We didn't know what we had in you." I reminded him that he had asked me in the interview why he should hire me and I had responded, "Because I am the best candidate who will interview for this job."
Someone shared this post with me because I was complaining in a Slack about how the theme of my career seems to be not getting hired for the position but later getting hired to fix the things that were fucked up by the person they did hire. Begs the question, is hiring really that difficult?
This tracks. As a gardener, you also have to be comfortable with things dying and general risks caused by events that are beyond your control. The weather, municipalities trying to kill mosquitoes and inadvertently killing pollinators, fauna that are hungrier than you are... the list is pretty long. It feels roughly the same to write 10K lines of code and then walk away from it when things don't work out.
Thanks for saying this. I'm trying cold frame gardening for the first time this year. My plants were doing really well, but this week I didn't keep as close a watch on it. My spinach and lettuce completely dried up. The peas and radishes are still really happy, so at least it's not a total loss.
Losing plants is still a bummer. I think I average over my lifetime ~60/40 for survive/die over here. The soil here is hard clay, which is not helped by decades of previous owners mowing the grass and setting the clippings out for collection. I've seen plants slowly push up and die because the roots couldn't work into the soil. Even with nearly 2 decades of amendment, it's nowhere near ideal. Weeds don't seem to mind, though. Funny how that works.
You're gaining a skill, though. For example, in future interviews, you will see obvious red flags that indicate a similar environment. Being able to gracefully navigate bureaucracy and not get burnt out by it is a very underrated skill.
These past few months, I have been slowly working through the audiobook version of Steven Strogatz' Infinite Powers. The work is enjoyable exactly because there's a bit of effort made to breathe life into the names everyone remembers. For example, Strogatz describes Archimedes as being so "neglectful of his person" that he had to be dragged to the bath; the irony being that one of the most famous anecdotes about him was a discovery he figured out in the bath. This is extra delightful to me since the beginning of my career was spent supporting these absent-minded professor types. I clearly remember realising that the path ahead of me was not going to result in some obvious legacy, despite whatever ambitions I had, but I could fix Dr Gell-Mann's printer. The working printer seemed to make him very happy, and I decided that was good enough. In 250 BC, someone just like me made sure Archimedes was clean and fed.
This post is pretty old, and I'm curious why it's been put up here today and what sort of conversation mmphosis was hoping for. To me, it reads as a half-considered opinion. Could it be that the siren song of ambition and personal legacy is a nice little perk if you can afford it? Is there a counter argument to be made that if you can't keep your personal shit together, you obviously lack the discipline required to turn those deep-thinky thoughts into a legacy? Are we taking digs at how the progress 2-3 productive coders make in the early, dark hours of a startup loses steam as it tries to scale? Anyone of these conversations overlooks a pretty crucial idea, which is potentially a more productive conversation in itself: how do we find and conscript those people who will fix our printers, run our errands, and generally work to move objects out of our way while we follow our delight? Do we have to occasionally treat their fiddly petitions for reassurance with respect, as a sort of payment for their efforts or do we simply assume that being around greatness is enough?
