May 12, 2009 at 8:01 am
By the same token Rudy, are you trying to test how the candidate does with a bunch of people staring wordlessly at them while they work? That's not really testing their team work. Or do you expect the candidate to be able to ask questions of and receive help from the person(people) watching them while they're doing their test? The only true test of "teamwork" in that situation would be to allow the candidate to keep up a running commentary with the watchers about what part of the schema they need to be looking for, any suggested methods as company best practice, etc. Otherwise you're not testing their teamwork abilities (or lone gunman mentality), you're just seeing how well they do with people staring at them while they work.
When hiring .NET programmers I tend to give them some very basic programming questions in the interview. Things that anyone who has taken Intro to .NET should be able to pseudocode out for me on the spot, along with some basic questions about a three table crow's foot DB diagram I sketch out for them. I'm consistently amazed at how few of the candidates claiming programming experience can actually answer those basic questions, and I've peer reviewed my tests a number of times to ensure I'm not being sneaky - they're really basic.
While I don't feel that a candidate for most positions needs to be able to sit down and list all 12 ways to do X in a system (I've had interviews with question after question like that and quite frankly they tell me more about the company trying to hire me - it tells me that company has no clue how to hire good people), I do feel that ensuring the candidate has the basics down weeds out more folks that you'd think. I don't want a candidate that can regurgitate every nuance of syntax and yet can't tell me when or why they'd use one over another - I'd rather have a candidate that can tell me of a couple of good ways to do something and the pros/cons of each method. The rest will come with a little training in how our company does things.
May 12, 2009 at 8:09 am
mike brockington (5/12/2009)
webrunner (5/12/2009)
if they have bad or no examples to back up their resume, you know they're not for real.I am curious about that - how exactly do you expect a candidate to provide details of work he has carried out on presumably confidential, internal systems?
Public websites are great, but we don't all have the luxury of working on them.
That's a good point. Depending on what a company allows (and asking about this can be tough if it is a tipoff that the candidate is applying out...), a candidate can change the object names and data. If even the structure of the code is confidential, then that is very tough. At that point, a candidate can talk only in general terms about how he or she solved a problem. But an employer has a right to ask for evidence that the candidate can do the work, and prior examples can help.
However, the SQL VM example has a benefit in that case, since (thinking pessimistically) a person could forge examples and printouts, whereas if they are put in a room with a new system, it is much harder for them to fake it. What they can do now may actually be more important in some cases than what they have done (or say they have done) in the past.
These are just my off-the-cuff opinions. I'm sure someone else has better answers about candidates who are coming from confidential positions.
- webrunner
-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
May 12, 2009 at 8:14 am
Good point Gary, maybe I should have clarified, one or two people could be present to provide 'background noise' (i.e idle chat at times) and also provide the service of a sounding board as well as answering environment specific questions. Teamwork and 'a good fit' are really the two most important things that just about all organizations want and need. This type of scenario seems like a good test for that as well. let me further clarify that this scenario should not be a 'Kobayashi Maru'.
RegardsRudy KomacsarSenior Database Administrator"Ave Caesar! - Morituri te salutamus."
May 12, 2009 at 8:17 am
jim.money (5/12/2009)
I fill the business analyst role in our small Company.Whenever I interview someone for an Analyst role, I pose a series of problems ranging from basic algebra to identifying the result set from a relatively simple 2 or 3 table join. With the exception of basic algebra, I do not expect them to get it right. But I do want them to explain their answer to me. I.e. what were they thinking.
It is important to me to see creativity in a problem solver.
Aside: A KM type of scenario is only unwinable if ones continues to color between the lines. Redefine the lines!
- disregard - somehow the system posted my reply to another post to this one. Speaking of troubleshooting... 🙂 ... there may be a bug in the reply posting code.
- webrunner
-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
May 12, 2009 at 8:19 am
Anye Mercy (5/12/2009)
I'm surprised at how many people seem to think ability to troubleshoot isn't a necessary skill for a developer or for strategic thinking. Troubleshooting is, at its essence, problem solving and unless you give someone a simple problem that they can read the solution from a script "Did you try rebooting? Is it plugged in?" then a person who shows they can solve a problem can likely solve the problem of translating from a "goal" (business problem) to a "solution" (application that meets the goal). Certainly there are other factors that will contribute to how good their solution is, but ability to troubleshoot is IMNSHO one of the big indicators that a person can actually think, reason and solve problems.
Thanks - that just about sums up my point of view. Troubleshooting is not everything, but it can sure help, and sometimes seeing someone troubleshoot a problem can tell you a lot about a person's persistence, intelligence, and creativity. I'd be surprised if a company did not want to find a place for someone they saw as a talented troubleshooter.
- webrunner
-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
May 12, 2009 at 8:51 am
The VM test isn't an all or nothing. It doesn't make the decision, it just provides input. Along with the questioning and interaction, this isn't "stump the chump", it's evaluating someone's ability to:
- work on a system (if they go alone) and diagnose issues, or point out potential problems.
- work with team members. You could have 3 people in the room answering questions, being team members that can provide information.
I think it's a valuable addition to an interviewing toolbox, not a replacement for an interview.
May 12, 2009 at 9:27 am
Speaking as someone who got the old bait and switch pulled on me--e.g. turned up for what I thought was going to be an interview, but they decided to give me a test instead--I would say that I don't have any objections to this type of testing, providing the candidate knows that's what's going to happen. There's a particular mindset you put yourself into for a face-to-face interview, and when you arrive to find something else entirely is expected of you...well, let's just say you're trying to shift into a different mindset without using the clutch, and things can get messy!
May 12, 2009 at 10:11 am
Paul,
I agree. Don't bait-and-switch. Let someone know what to expect in the interview.
May 12, 2009 at 10:54 am
There is also something to be said for a person who is willing to admit that they do not know a particular answer (speaking of the KM situation) Of course the next question would be: "How would go about finding the solution?"
May 12, 2009 at 11:21 am
paul.knibbs (5/12/2009)
Speaking as someone who got the old bait and switch pulled on me--e.g. turned up for what I thought was going to be an interview, but they decided to give me a test instead--I would say that I don't have any objections to this type of testing, providing the candidate knows that's what's going to happen. There's a particular mindset you put yourself into for a face-to-face interview, and when you arrive to find something else entirely is expected of you...well, let's just say you're trying to shift into a different mindset without using the clutch, and things can get messy!
This has been pulled on me twice once by a company trying to get a web development contract with Michigan university Ann Arbor and most recently by Collebera on Microsoft contract. The first was to have conversation with the company technical person he started a C# technical interview test. The second I was asked to take a Proveit test one hour after talking to a recruiter, a quick search on Google shows it was very funky crappy syntax heavy test. I have never got a job without test but being tricked to one is cruel.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
May 12, 2009 at 11:36 am
I like the vm idea. My strengths are definitely in the trial by fire troubleshooting, performance and administration. I am good at coding and db creation but i thrive in the 'we have no backup and our db is corrupt' category or our system slowed down massively over the weekend and we didn't change anything. Setting up a vm is a more applicable test as you can see what a person's coding skills are as well as their troubleshooting. What good is it if a person can write a select statement on paper but doesn't have a clue how to support the system. It only proves they read a tsql book. Having a vm you could have a corrupt db, a good db, maintenance plans, Configuration issues, SSRS etc. You can ask them to create a report which returns x,y and z. This will show their knowledge of SSRS, their ability to troubleshoot issues, and optimize the system. Obviously it would need to be streamlined to your environment but i think it could really work. It will also show you if they do a lot of Rambo style techniques or if they use good controls and conventions. You could run so far as to have a payload running in the background to simulate other traffic. It woudl take some time to build but could be very useful if you are in a situation with a lot of applicants. An hour of their time and a few of yours is far better than documenting reasons to get rid of them later.
May 12, 2009 at 11:48 am
I like the vm idea. My strengths are definitely in the trial by fire troubleshooting, performance and administration. I am good at coding and db creation but i thrive in the 'we have no backup and our db is corrupt' category or our system slowed down massively over the weekend and we didn't change anything. Setting up a vm is a more applicable test as you can see what a person's coding skills are as well as their troubleshooting. What good is it if a person can write a select statement on paper but doesn't have a clue how to support the system. It only proves they read a tsql book.
This is covered by exam 70-431 so asking a person who have passed it is not good on the employer.
Having a vm you could have a corrupt db, a good db, maintenance plans, Configuration issues, SSRS etc. You can ask them to create a report which returns x,y and z. This will show their knowledge of SSRS, their ability to troubleshoot issues, and optimize the system.
That is not very true because SSRS covers T-SQL, Asp.net, SMTP,IIS and other features all or some can stop your code, it does not mean you are not skilled it just means you don't know the system setup, permissions and other relevant issues.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
May 12, 2009 at 11:56 am
Non-completion does not mean failure. And that needs to be made evident. I don't like the 'impossible question' idea. If you do a vm it really needs to be geared to your environment and the skills you need, as well as the level of experience you are hiring. Not something that will work for all... really depends what you are looking for. As for something being covered in an exam... not sure how i feel about that. I know a lot of folks who pass exams but can't apply anything.
May 12, 2009 at 12:05 pm
I know SQL Server from 7.0 and knows the internals so I know it is not possible to pass exam 70-431 with above 900 score if you don't know SSMS 2005, that is the reason for the high fail rate of the exam. And if SSRS issues can be fixed Microsoft will not be depreciating actual bugs handed to the SSRS team in person and Microsoft will not be changing docs. In April 2009 SSRS permissions are now required in your SMTP server in most companies this take away IIS not required because by default most small companies don't run exchange because IIS SMTP works just fine with all SSRS operations.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
May 12, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Robert Hermsen (5/12/2009)
Non-completion does not mean failure. And that needs to be made evident. I don't like the 'impossible question' idea. If you do a vm it really needs to be geared to your environment and the skills you need, as well as the level of experience you are hiring. Not something that will work for all... really depends what you are looking for. As for something being covered in an exam... not sure how i feel about that. I know a lot of folks who pass exams but can't apply anything.
I agree wholeheartedly with all these sentiments, although I think that rather than impossible the scenario could certainly be multifold and complicated. The expectation shouldn't be that they figure it out immediately but that you can see the process by which they attempt to figure it out and see how far they get, and whether they seem to be even in the right ballpark for the task at hand.
--
Anye Mercy
"Service Unavailable is not an Error" -- John, ENOM support
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." -- Inigo Montoya in "Princess Bride"
"Civilization exists by geologic consent, subject to change without notice." -- Will Durant
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 32 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply