August 18, 2009 at 9:53 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Test Drive
August 19, 2009 at 1:35 am
I've had probation periods at two of the companies that I've worked for. They have to be very carefully set up in the contracts (labour laws are quite strict here and favour the employee), and the usually amount to much reduced notice periods (on both sides). I don't know how well they'd play out in practice if the employer did decide to let someone go during or after it. I haven't seen it happen.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
August 19, 2009 at 1:39 am
Its a nice idea, but what if you're looking for a new job whilst currently employed? I couldn't just take 2 days off (after a morning/afternoon off the week before for an interview) at the drop of a hat. Or would one have to leave their current job before the trial period starts, or before looking for new work?
I think there's a calculated risk hiring anyone new, but it swings both ways. This is why there are normally probation periods where either side can give a weeks notice.
August 19, 2009 at 2:15 am
... I'm not too sure about this probation thing... what happens if for example you are hired at a new company, you quit your job at your previous company, and after 3 months probation or so the new company decides they will not keep you?
You are now stuck without a job when you previously had a stable job (which you quit to try out the new job).
In some countries the logistics behind making use of a probationary period are too cumbersome for companies to even bother implementing probation (you need to set realistic standards for the employee,you need to give continuous feedback to the employee, you need to be on hand to assist the employee should they be falling short, you need a watertight policy regarding implementation of probation).
I think a two day probation should do the trick (the prospective employee can take 2 days off from their current job, perform some tasks in the new job, and a decision can be made from how things went )
August 19, 2009 at 2:45 am
The comments already made are indeed the logistical issues Steve mentioned in the article. However, in principle I think it's a great idea. How many times have we thought, "if only I can show them what I can do for their company...."? Well this is a means of doing just that, and I'd personally welcome the opportunity if I were looking for a new job.
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
August 19, 2009 at 3:35 am
For a previous company I attended a two day session which included one interview, a raft of tests to make sure I was not an axe wielding murderer. In addition we got to meet people from all levels of the company. We had to prepare a presentation as well. All of this meant that we had more than a brief glimpse of the other side. This cuts both ways if you dont like them better to find out before you leave your old job.
I have had a couple of jobs in the UK with probationary periods. None of them ended up in me leaving. In fact nobody ever took any notice of the probationary period. I guess it could be very different if some companies wanted to be funny.
Next interview I want to get a good feel for the place I will be working in. You spend so much time there and its so important its got to be right.
Ells.
😎
August 19, 2009 at 4:50 am
Test drive is great, but only really works for contract employees or people out of work. Very hard to get a FTE to drop out of their current job and take up a 2 day trial before full hire.
Longer term probabtion periods are more the norm in Europe.
August 19, 2009 at 5:32 am
Seems odd, the notion of probation periods in new hires. All most all of the positions I've seen offered in the past few years have been contract to hire, typically 3 months. Another difference here (in isolated CT) is we're a "work at will" state. An employer can terminate your job with / without cause. Just as I am free to say, "screw you" and walk out. Cuts both ways.
I know this seems odd to many people, but I prefer it.
If a master leads a man by a rope, then by that rope are both master and man bound. -Frederick Douglas
Do not make the mistake...of thinking that a worker is a slave and that he holds his job by his employer's permission. He does not hold it by permission - but by contract, that is, by a voluntary mutual agreement. A worker can quit his job; a slave cannot. -Ayn Rand
Honor Super Omnia-
Jason Miller
August 19, 2009 at 5:42 am
I've been out of work for four months although I'm (finally) starting a new job on Monday with a great company. During that four months I've experienced a wide variety of interview and hiring techniques. For larger companies the trend seems to be toward "contract-to-hire". This is particularly true for higher end architectural level positions. They bring you in on a six-month contract and, if all goes well, they'll roll you over into a permanent slot.
As for interview techniques, I've also done the "presentation" thing where I had to present to a technical team information about a project I had worked on, the decisions I had made and why. I've also been tested and faced six hour marathon interviews and 2-hour panel interviews.
I'd have certainly been willing to do a two or three day test run but the logistics seem formidable. You'd need a pretty serious non-disclosure and possibly even a non-compete agreement and a contractual agreement that allows the potential employer to blow you off without fear of legal repercussions. I also wouldn't want these candidates connecting to my network nor would I want to go to the time and expense of configuring equipment for them etc. After awhile, all that your left with is sitting in a conference room exchanging ideas just like any other interview.
The good news is that I found a relatively vibrant job market. The bad news is that everyone wants a candidate to be an expert in every aspect of SQL Server 2000, 2005 and 2008 including the engine, SSIS, SSAS, and SSRS as well as an accomplished .NET developer but they're only willing to pay for an entry to mid-level position. Approximately 65% of the time I didn't get the job because I was "overqualified". (I read that as wanting too much money.) A few times it was because they didn't think I would "fit in". This was certainly true in one case but in the other cases I suspect it was because they thought I was too old. (30 years experience)
As for compensation, the contract rates have dropped to ridiculously low levels and full-time salaries have dropped fairly significantly as well. I took a 10% cut from my last full-time job and consider myself lucky because this is offset by the fact that the job is in my home town (10 minute commute) and I don't have to pay any state taxes. (I live right on the border of a tax free state and the state on the other side of the border has a 6% tax rate.) From a net standpoint it's almost a wash.
"Beliefs" get in the way of learning.
August 19, 2009 at 5:56 am
Robert Frasca (8/19/2009)
The good news is that I found a relatively vibrant job market. The bad news is that everyone wants a candidate to be an expert in every aspect of SQL Server 2000, 2005 and 2008 including the engine, SSIS, SSAS, and SSRS as well as an accomplished .NET developer but they're only willing to pay for an entry to mid-level position.
I always keep my eyes open. I also have a couple of friends that are headhunters, and principals in respectable consulting firms. I'm quite familiar with the "Candidate must have TSQL, SSAS, SSRS, Informatica, Oracle PL/SQL, UDB, C++ experience all at the senior level" and then have a salary range half of what it should be. :w00t:
The employers smell blood and are perfectly happy taking the desperate enough players. Problem is, once things improve, those desperate people will be among the first to flee.
I'm happy that I'm employed, but realistic enough to know that it could all change tomorrow/today. Hence the constant searching, looking, etc.
Honor Super Omnia-
Jason Miller
August 19, 2009 at 5:59 am
My husband lost his job last November, just before Thanksgiving. Early this summer, he was asked to take a contract position with a company because one of their employees was going to go on vacation. He would be trained by her for a week and then cover for her during her vacation. As it turned out, he showed her a few things and proved that he was a better fit for the company than she was. For example, her layouts would come back several times for changes to be made; his first several layouts came back approved by the client with no changes needed.
It was also "common knowledge" that this person was going to give her notice when she got back from vacation. This was good news for my husband who was hoping that this would turn into a permanent position. When she got back, she ended up asking instead to take a 2 week Leave of Absence so she could test drive this new job. A week after she asked for the LOA, she was told that she had to make a decision - stay or go. She ended up deciding to go and her "final day" was just after the July 4 holiday. It was looking better for my husband to get hired on permanently.
Two weeks pass and this woman is back at her old desk. Later that same day, my husband is told that he would no longer be needed and they ended his contract. He's back to looking for a job and hasn't had any luck.
I think you can tell by my real life example of job test driving that it only worked out for the "driver". Everyone else - the company that hired her, the company she left/came back to, my husband, and our family - was adversely affected by it.
August 19, 2009 at 6:00 am
Interesting concept!
I don't think I'd drop a fulltime gig to go to a 1 week contract, but most companies have at lease some sort of probationary period. But it depends on the job I guess?
I do know alot of companies like to start out people as contractors then hire them full time if they work out.
August 19, 2009 at 6:01 am
Our parent company implemented a plan about a year and a half ago where new hires are brought on for a 6 month probation period, during which they are paid as contractors. We are permitted to request the person go from contract to full hire any time within that period if we feel the person has proven their worth to any of our teams. At first I was not comfortable with this plan but in fact, it has worked out very well thus far.
In my experience with this plan, the best aspect has less to do with assessing talent, than assessing "good fit" with our existing team. We have had two people who did very well in their interviews, and were brought on board, but they did not last the 6 month probation and in both cases it was because they didn't measure up during crunch-times with our work because they could not gel very well as team players.
I am now a big proponent of this tactic. What I have found frustrating during the latter years of my career is that you can often hire very talented people, but they lack either social or team skills and that makes their talent less valuable. This plan eliminates that threat very nicely and allows us to have a very talented, but equally cohesive staff.
August 19, 2009 at 6:17 am
Jason Miller (8/19/2009)
The employers smell blood and are perfectly happy taking the desperate enough players. Problem is, once things improve, those desperate people will be among the first to flee.
I'm happy that I'm employed, but realistic enough to know that it could all change tomorrow/today. Hence the constant searching, looking, etc.
I have been looking around and if lucky may be interviewing soon. Again they dont want to pay so I am trying to negotiate on all of the other conditions. I said the same to the agent concerned I will take it if I can see the contract out on the rate I unlike others wont start what I cant finish. Plenty of other people will take any contract and then jump as soon as they get a better offer.
Ells.
😎
August 19, 2009 at 6:34 am
Probation periods are ok, but have you ever heard of them getting used in a case where the person would not have been terminated anyways? I like the idea of a try before you buy. There is risk here for the employee and the to be employer however I don't feel it is outrageous. If you are looking for a new job it means you really do want a change if you are willing to put yourself out there. If you are wishy washy it will potentially keep you from job hopping. Many interviews include a test now. This is good, however I know i don't test well on paper. Give me a real true to life blown up SQL box and I will fix it very well. Give me a problem query and I will tune it. It goes along the same lines as a certification is often a ticket to an interview but not necessarily an ability to perform a task.
We started to do a 2-4 hour shadow as part of the interview more so that we could see how they interacted and their attention span. It lets you glean a bit from their character as well. A full day of that with a mix of 'Here, fix this' could be good.
I wonder though where the line is between interview and contractor. I would assume that if they are doing production work they would have to be a contractor. I don't know that anyone who is in need of a job would complain either way if it is only done as part of the final candidate process and not for every interview.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 51 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply