|
I'm in late/final stages with Google, Twitter, Apple, Datadog, and Okta and just got rejected from Spotify, but beyond that, if those should fall through (which is likely, tbh, because they're all Senior positions besides Google which does later leveling obvi) it's all companies I have absolutely no idea how to gauge qualify of and really no idea where to even look. Seems like it's just a gamble? I used to think "any place that copies the Google process must be good" but that was 8 years ago before I had my first engineering job lmao
Good Will Hrunting fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Aug 15, 2021 |
#
?
Aug 15, 2021 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 19:49 |
|
|
I’ve heard from women who have applied to Okta that the vibe they got from their contacts on the inside and during the interview process that it’s a pathologically bro atmosphere with little room for diverse voices.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2021 21:09
|
|
|
every single comapny listed is way too fuckin big to judge all individual teams inside of. judge teams not company for all of those
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2021 21:10
|
|
|
Just FYI I didn't post the listed companies because I want to know more about them, I posted them as examples of places I'm interviewing at that are large enough that if I don't like my team I could always switch. I'm more concerned about small companies with a lot less options for switching.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2021 21:26
|
|
|
If a company is successful, I think you're unlikely to run into completely terrible engineers, or at least a full team of them. The algo interview process also sets a bar that the engineers can solve them which includes coding. I'd be a lot more concerned about company and team culture than engineer quality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 00:19
|
|
|
asur posted:If a company is successful, I think you're unlikely to run into completely terrible engineers, or at least a full team of them. Yeah that's.. the crux of the problem. How do you evaluate engineering teams at companies that aren't successful yet? I'd rather not go to one, but given that the algorithm lottery may gently caress me, or system design may gently caress me, or there may be no team fit, it's certainly a possibility. Also I don't want to go down the LC rabbit hole but I've worked with awful engineers who went on to FAANGs, so I do not have confidence in them being the screener that some might think they are in terms of engineer quality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:Yeah that's.. the crux of the problem. How do you evaluate engineering teams at companies that aren't successful yet? I'd rather not go to one, but given that the algorithm lottery may gently caress me, or system design may gently caress me, or there may be no team fit, it's certainly a possibility. I would ask people that were interviewing at my old startup what their favorite movie was. Gave great insight into their personality and if they had absolutely trash taste.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
Gildiss posted:I would ask people that were interviewing at my old startup what their favorite movie was. this is bad, don't do this
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 01:52
|
|
|
Jose Valasquez posted:this is bad, don't do this Mostly just a gauge if I had to pretend to have watched the latest marvel movie with them or not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 02:25
|
|
|
Oh cool you like Star Trek. Oh your favorite Star Trek is Into Darkness. Huh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 02:29
|
|
|
you aren't making this sound better
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 02:30
|
|
|
Gildiss can you tell me where you work/hire?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 02:32
|
|
|
A rinky dink startup that I had to work at to make it through the initial pandemic in South Korea. You are in no danger of working there as the pay was horrific even by South Korean standards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 02:35
|
|
|
sk places you're better off asking about attitudes towards women at work and peacing out if they just start spewing korean antifeminist poo poo at you
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 02:49
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:Very broad question but: what are good ways to gauge the quality of engineers and EMs at a company from interview process? Is it even possible without knowing someone on the inside? What does quality mean here? Are you talking about getting along well with them? If so, that's entirely a roll of the dice unless you meet a lot of the folks on the team. Are you talking about raw skill? If so, who cares? 10x programmers are some of the worst people to work with. I'd much rather spend my 8 hours a day with folks that are fun to be around and that I enjoy. Quality of worked shipped should always be secondary to that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 03:06
|
|
|
That's a reasonable take. I have been at three companies that have been awful about growing engineers and mentorship so anything to help gauge that would be great but like you insinuated it's pretty much seemingly impossible. You can definitely fudge answers to any questions too I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:Yeah that's.. the crux of the problem. How do you evaluate engineering teams at companies that aren't successful yet? I'd rather not go to one, but given that the algorithm lottery may gently caress me, or system design may gently caress me, or there may be no team fit, it's certainly a possibility. I meant the company has a product with users, preferably one you can either use or get some sort of review of. I'd be very hesitant about joining a company that doesn't have this without a strong personal connection. You're somewhat all other the place though as growth and mentorship are very different than quality. Opportunities for growth are generally easy to find at companies that are growing though the larger the company the more team dependent it is. Ask the engineers on the team what growth opportunities they've had and ask the manager about growth opportunities for yourself. Mentorship, on the other hand, is much harder to find if you don't put a lot of effort into seeking it out. You can ask the manager about it at a team level, but generally higher or outside that is hit or miss as you'll need to forge you're own connections.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 05:47
|
|
|
When I last interviewed, I had a hard requirement that I not be the only woman or only person of color on the immediate team. I have no illusions about the makeup of the industry, at least here in the states, and I passed over some cool looking startups, but I just didn't want to climb a hill I didn't have to. (also if you're a long standing company in a diverse area and you can't retain women or people of color long enough to have two at once, then lmao, there's probably a cultural issue anyway)
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 14:49
|
|
|
Mecca-Benghazi posted:When I last interviewed, I had a hard requirement that I not be the only woman or only person of color on the immediate team. I have no illusions about the makeup of the industry, at least here in the states, and I passed over some cool looking startups, but I just didn't want to climb a hill I didn't have to. (also if you're a long standing company in a diverse area and you can't retain women or people of color long enough to have two at once, then lmao, there's probably a cultural issue anyway) This one place I interviewed for surprised me when I saw that they had multiple (!!!) female developers. Unsurprisingly there were a lot of hits for people complaining that they applied for a "women-only" position and got turned down for not being women. The last place I worked at had zero female developers. Really sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 15:34
|
|
|
marumaru posted:This one place I interviewed for surprised me when I saw that they had multiple (!!!) female developers. Unsurprisingly there were a lot of hits for people complaining that they applied for a "women-only" position and got turned down for not being women. I've been job-hunting lately and it is immensely depressing how few women I've encountered outside of the recruiters and receptionists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 15:46
|
|
|
My previous job (public sector) had almost 50% women, but my current (private sector) has none.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
When I started at my current job, we had 3 developers who were women. Now we have only 1, despite the team having grown by 50%. I'm part of the hiring process, though there are multiple screens before me, and I haven't even seen a woman even come through there. So I dunno if there just aren't any applicants that are women, a bias earlier in the screening process, or something that makes women not interested in even applying here. A good chunk of our hires come from an outside recruiter, so it's always possible they have a bias in how they select candidates to send to us. We have plenty of women working in tech adjacent stuff, our analysts, project managers, etc are almost exclusively women. That seems to be somewhat the norm based on my last couple jobs unfortunately. This sure seems to be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
Edit: Stupid mouse, double post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:A good chunk of our hires come from an outside recruiter, so it's always possible they have a bias in how they select candidates to send to us. Ask them to see their data on the demographics of who they approach. I'd bet it'll turn out to be overwhelmingly white males.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
I helped with our recent hiring cycle. Our internal recruiter had a pretty representative sample (we're computational linguists, so it is a bit more diverse than CS in general because a lot of folks come in through theoretical linguistics, which is woman heavy and not a total white dude fest, at least at the undergrad level), the external recruiter got all white and international Asian men. I did have a chat with the internal recruiter and was pretty loose with the educational background requirements, didn't interact with the external recruiters. I went (virtual) campus recruiting at my alma mater and ended up getting direct applications from a slight majority of women. Guess I scare men off?  All of our non international, not white applicants came in through direct application (linkedin or company website) now that I'm thinking about it. Uh, what I'm saying is, overload your non-white male employees with recruitment work and you'll get more diverse hires 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 21:24
|
|
|
I had to do some learning when I first started the hiring process. Check my perspective and all that. My initial applicants were 80% white men, and 20% other men. Reconfigured the listing and now it's more like 50% white men, 40% other men, and 10% women. I'm going to count that as a success since women only make up around 10% of the industry in general. The biggest keys were: 1) putting benefits up-front 2) only listing the experience that was absolutely required 3) Not listing our other technologies with any sort of requirements on experience, and instead just listing them as "things we use" 4) Explicitly calling out that we're welcoming women and BIPOC to apply I don't know if that's actually what worked, but our quality of candidate went up significantly after making those changes. Anyway, dunno if that helps at all, but it's definitely hard to find women in development, and it's easy to not hire women if you don't make any of that effort. And I think it's important to make that effort.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
Saw this on LinkedIn just now: One reason for the tech industry’s Great Resignation: lack of diversity quote:In a survey of 2,030 workers between the ages of 18 and 28 conducted in July, the company found that 50% said they had left or wanted to leave a tech or IT job “because the company culture made them feel unwelcome or uncomfortable,” with a higher percentage of women and Asian, Black, and Hispanic respondents each saying they had such an experience. And 68% of respondents said they have felt uncomfortable in a tech role because of “their gender/ethnicity/socio-economic background or neurodevelopmental condition,” according to the Wiley report.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
kayakyakr posted:4) Explicitly calling out that we're welcoming women and BIPOC to apply I'm male and basically white. When I see something like this I find it to be a slight negative. I worry that it's a meaningless line by an HR department that doesn't prioritize it enough to do/promise more. I would rather see something more concrete; e.g. do you offer trans-inclusive health benefits? Obviously my opinion on this doesn't matter as much as the candidates you're actually trying to attract, and I'd like to hear takes from them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 22:14
|
|
|
The only thing I give a poo poo about is how many non-white-bros (not non-white bros) you have in your management and leadership positions. Everything else is fluff to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
This is a complete baseless take but I feel like the only really meaningful way of getting more female (and BIPOC, to a slightly lesser extent) would be to straight up open positions specifically for those groups. Yeah it'll piss off everyone else but it's the price to pay
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 22:25
|
|
|
At my last job we had two female POC, one of them was a front end developer, they split the front end team in half and made one of those women the manager of the new group, they promoted her to senior for a week prior to that, just kind of rammed it through, nothing exploded or caught on fire. They fired the old qa manager who was a guy, replaced him with a lady, she turned around and hired a female POC coordinator who seemed underqualified, but again nothing exploded or caught on fire
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
marumaru posted:This is a complete baseless take but I feel like the only really meaningful way of getting more female (and BIPOC, to a slightly lesser extent) would be to straight up open positions specifically for those groups. Yeah it'll piss off everyone else but it's the price to pay (Really hoping this doesn't turn the discussion into a loving nightmare) I'm not a lawyer but isn't that illegal? I'm pretty sure the entire idea of not being able to discriminate cuts both ways. You can't not hire someone because they're a woman/minority, but you also can't not hire someone because they're not a woman/minority.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 00:16
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:The only thing I give a poo poo about is how many non-white-bros (not non-white bros) you have in your management and leadership positions. Everything else is fluff to me. Definitely this. Check their about page and if takes you several minutes to find a non-white-bro, they probably don't practice what they preach. I also have a fun hobby of asking internal recruiters what they're doing to increase diversity and inclusion. This is usually a good way to have them never contact you again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 00:20
|
|
|
New Yorp New Yorp posted:(Really hoping this doesn't turn the discussion into a loving nightmare) Pretty much much all public sector jobs here have a policy of everything else being equal to prefer the minority candidate. For nursing that means men.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 00:34
|
|
|
New Yorp New Yorp posted:(Really hoping this doesn't turn the discussion into a loving nightmare) Yes, it is illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. https://www.eeoc.gov/prohibited-employment-policiespractices
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
thotsky posted:Pretty much much all public sector jobs here have a policy of everything else being equal to prefer the minority candidate. For nursing that means men. AIUI there is a difference between this, where everyone is considered for a job but the minority candidate is given preference and the OPs idea of creating positions only for those minority candidates.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
yeah. if you don't prefer the minority candidate when all else is equal you're not thinking straight because being a minority is harder than not-that, so ceteris isn't paribus
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 01:26
|
|
|
I will assume, that for those places doing affirmative action right, like where I used to work, there's some flexibility here. Like, it's hard to quantify what makes a candidate better than another, and so often it comes down to gut feelings and "culture fit". So, if after going through 40 candidates, 36 of which were white men, you're left with two dudes and a woman that seem fit for the job, you should be choosing the woman even if one of the guys went to a slightly better school, or really wowed you with his craft beer knowledge or whatever. Especially if men already vastly outnumber women at your workplace.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 02:10
|
|
|
"favor the minority candidate" is a very well-intentioned policy, but a lot of people coming from non-traditional backgrounds feel like they have to prove that they're not just a diversity hire, and you have to be very careful not to make that worse. As a white guy I'm not really capable of saying what the right way to do that is, but I'm not sure that anyone really knows.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 19:49 |
|
|
I'd always taken the stance that, given multiple candidates, always be biased against the white bro. You don't have to tell anyone about it if you're afraid it's "illegal", and they can always get a job at the next place. "Culture fit" is usually just a polite name for systemic racism, in my experience. I don't even live in a predominately white area, and 99% of my colleagues are white, including me. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2021 04:05
|
|
