Coding challenges and HackerRank

/

I am typically not a fan of coding challenges as a part of tech companies' recruitment processes, as I think they're pretty off-putting for high-value/top-quality candidates. But I never thought about Hackerrank or coding challenges as more than just a means to disqualify the obviously bad engineers. After reading this article, my opinions have changed on some points and remained the same on others: 

Pros: 

  • HR and other bootcamps/coding programs seems to have increased the pool of employable engineers. I have spent my entire career recruiting for elite and small tech companies but never considered places like financial institutions and banks that "need to fill so many programming jobs that elite schools can't possibly pump out enough candidates". 
  • HackerRank has given the VERY small pool of "Gregory Furlong"s the opportunity to join elite start-ups that otherwise wouldn't have hired him based on his resume. In most cases, I think poor resumes are indicative of what would be a weak coding performance but for the 1ish% of top engineers who are self-taught, HR allows them to be recognized when their resumes would have likely been thrown out upon first glance. 

Cons: 

  • When used as part of the interview process, these challenges tend to be off-putting and a waste of time for top engineers (I think they can say "we don't have time to speak with you unless you pass this test")
  • They tend to slow down an already lengthy recruitment process (sending a challenge and then waiting for it to be returned can sometimes take weeks)
  • Although I mention this gives the top 1ish % of engineers the opportunity to work at an elite software company, the majority of self-taught/bootcamp engineers are still too weak to work in these environments 

Work less, do more

/

Lately I have noticed a lot of my peers boasting about the number of hours per week they work or the amount of time they spend in their respective offices. I've also noticed bosses and managers encouraging and sometimes demanding their employees to stay in the office late into the evening. I'm not a fan. I think companies need to start developing different metrics to reward individual performance rather than hours spent working. One's promotions or praise shouldn't be given based on the pure number of hours spent sitting in a room. Managers should be giving their employees tangible metrics and goals on which to deliver and then rewarding those people for results produced. 

Luckily I work by myself and for myself, so I'm able to determine what is considered a solid day's work and when I can shut down my computer for the evening. I've actually learned I'm most productive at around 40 hours of work a week--more than that and my productivity actually plateaus. I'm also most productive with about eight or so hours of sleep. There's an article that was just written in the Washington Post that I think actually covers most of this. 

 

Blog Debut

/

Next month marks one year since I left my first recruiting job and started CJM Search. By making this change, I have continued to work with great people at Palantir while also working with people at other great tech companies doing some amazing work. And while I miss being in the office every day with my former coworkers, I now get to spend my days with my beagle-mix and unofficial cofounder, Roy. 

Through this blog, I hope to share some thoughts on the market for software engineers and recommend some reading to potential candidates and hiring staff. I might also link to stories unrelated to my field that I find interesting, like this one about using an anthropologist to sell SPAM. 

One key issue in the engineering hiring market is equity compensation. I'm very pro-equity, so long as you understand the risk. It's a great tool for cash-strapped young companies and it's a great opportunity for engineers to capture the upside of their work. That said, I like to remind anyone with whom I work about the potential risk, particularly given the increasing duration between the start-up of a company and its IPO. With that in mind, Matt Levine of Bloomberg View wrote a great column about employee stock at a private start-up and I highly recommend you read it.