undefined | Better HN

story

0 pointseverdev6y ago0 comments

> companies like Google and Facebook can afford to miss out on those devs. But smaller companies should be looking for diamonds in the rough

I'd say it's the opposite. Big companies can afford to take a shot on someone and miss without materially impacting the business.

If I'm hiring developer #2 at my 5 person startup, I want someone confident and cool under pressure who has done something similar to what I'm building so many times in real life that the coding test is a cake walk.

A dev hire on a small engineering team (< 5 people) can make or break the business. I'm trying to de-risk that hire as much as possible. I want to design a test that 90% of people will fail so I can find that top 10% developer.

Once I get to 15-20+ devs, I'm much more likely to relax my criteria and look for a diamond in the rough.

0 comments

stuxnet796y ago

I agree. Hiring has both a non-trivial time and money cost. The very same companies that would benefit from finding diamonds in the rough usually don't have the resources to find these devs in the first place. The modern coding interview is designed for the processes and needs of larger tech cos with large amounts of resources. Cargo cult at your own discretion.

justfor1comment6y ago

This is reasonable from your vantage point. But why should that talented person work for your fledgling startup? Wouldn't he or she have more options on the table?

everdevOP6y ago

Absolutely. Then it's all about selling the team, the company and it's potential. If you can't sell your vision to your employees you probably won't be able to sell to your customers either.

HillaryBriss6y ago

yes. also factor in the probability of receiving a huge number of qualified applicants: for Google it is as close to 1 as it is for any company. for the startup it's far lower. Google does not need to take these risks.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse