John Magee joined us this time one year ago after a career in sales and events. Over this year he has learnt a lot, and has experienced all of what recruitment has to offer!
John is not even known by his name any more at SoCode Recruitment, and is just known as 'Java', after really immersing himself into his market.
Java has been a hit with the whole team and we are looking forward to the next year and his continued success!
#socoderecruitment#workanniversary#employeeappreciation#1year
If you're hiring, with tons of applicants, there's no better way to spend $19 than on the #MCode Lite assessment and this new #JobFit assessment (https://lnkd.in/gfUP7ncb).
Check out this quick video...
Founder & CEO at R Talent Partners | Advisor to top-level executives, leaders, and managers on the latest trends and innovative methods in talent acquisition | Mindset Consultant⭐ |
🎭 Recruitment Riddle Time! 🕵️♀️
Can you guess the job role?
I speak in code, but I'm not a spy.
I debug problems, but I'm not an exterminator.
I work with Java, but I'm not a barista.
I create windows, but I'm not a glazier.
What am I?
Bonus: Share your most creative wrong answers below! 😂
#RecruitmentFun#CareerRiddles#TechJobs
I completely agree with Jamie Aronson 👏 . I’ve always found those traditional interviews ridiculous and have refused to conduct them in the typical “let’s see if you can implement a binary search, so I’ll know if you can write a REST controller!” approach. Nonsense!
I’ve often wondered if interviews for hiring skilled laborers, like a forklift operator, require practical tests, or if their certificate and track record suffice. In any case, I’ve played the exercise game, but in my own way. First, I ask candidates to solve problems without an IDE, just on a text editor. I’m not interested in whether it compiles but in seeing if the candidate can think clearly, spot bugs, or explain how they’d set up tests. And for fairness, I always let them ask me something I don’t know.
I can't wait to hire software engineers purely based on a conversation and reference checks.
Leetcode, hackerank and whatever code exercises are dead. The tools available to us nowadays enable people to do far more than ever before. As long as you can read code and have a logical thought process, your ability to regurgetate a bredth first search of a binary tree in O(n) time complexity means absolutely squat.
My process would look a little something like this:
- Filter cv's based on skill matches
- conversations with candidates on the short list
- reference checks of those candidates who I got along with
- further conversation with shorter list and then decision
As long as you have a track record of being able to do what you say you can, all I care about is what kind of person you are.
Maybe I haven't thought about it all the way.. what do you think?
I am of the opinion that both are necessary, and still need to be taken with a grain of salt. I need to know you can code, see what you produce and the kind of thought process you have to solve problems that sometimes is very hard to get from a conversation.
On the other hand leetcode, hackerank and others are far from reliable data points as to whether or not an engineer will be able to produce good solutions to the many problems a company faces (and understand what the kind of breadth of skills this engineer has). From a management perspective you need to view the candidate through a holistic lens, where you would calibrate what is more important for the position (usually helps having more than one person participate on the hiring process so perceptions are not biased).
I can't wait to hire software engineers purely based on a conversation and reference checks.
Leetcode, hackerank and whatever code exercises are dead. The tools available to us nowadays enable people to do far more than ever before. As long as you can read code and have a logical thought process, your ability to regurgetate a bredth first search of a binary tree in O(n) time complexity means absolutely squat.
My process would look a little something like this:
- Filter cv's based on skill matches
- conversations with candidates on the short list
- reference checks of those candidates who I got along with
- further conversation with shorter list and then decision
As long as you have a track record of being able to do what you say you can, all I care about is what kind of person you are.
Maybe I haven't thought about it all the way.. what do you think?
Forget technical tests and Leetcode.
The ultimate test before hiring a new developer should be:
Dress this uncooperative toddler.
It will give candidates the opportunity to show perseverance, ability under pressure, working with hostile stakeholders, agility…
All-in-all, the ideal interview test.
Leetcode and other algorithmic exercises definitely do not help, but I would ask to do one small coding task that is relevant to your day-to-day work. Just take something that you do and simplify it to the bare minimum, so that it can be completed in 1-2 hours. For example, if you do compilers in C/C++, ask to write an expression parser. If you follow the AI crowd, ask to write a simple program using OpenAI API. References are subjective, but when you see a code that the person wrote, you can make your own judgement.
I can't wait to hire software engineers purely based on a conversation and reference checks.
Leetcode, hackerank and whatever code exercises are dead. The tools available to us nowadays enable people to do far more than ever before. As long as you can read code and have a logical thought process, your ability to regurgetate a bredth first search of a binary tree in O(n) time complexity means absolutely squat.
My process would look a little something like this:
- Filter cv's based on skill matches
- conversations with candidates on the short list
- reference checks of those candidates who I got along with
- further conversation with shorter list and then decision
As long as you have a track record of being able to do what you say you can, all I care about is what kind of person you are.
Maybe I haven't thought about it all the way.. what do you think?
I can't wait to hire software engineers purely based on a conversation and reference checks.
Leetcode, hackerank and whatever code exercises are dead. The tools available to us nowadays enable people to do far more than ever before. As long as you can read code and have a logical thought process, your ability to regurgetate a bredth first search of a binary tree in O(n) time complexity means absolutely squat.
My process would look a little something like this:
- Filter cv's based on skill matches
- conversations with candidates on the short list
- reference checks of those candidates who I got along with
- further conversation with shorter list and then decision
As long as you have a track record of being able to do what you say you can, all I care about is what kind of person you are.
Maybe I haven't thought about it all the way.. what do you think?
Unlock the full potential of your career in tech with CODE Review. Gain exclusive access to career-boosting resources, stay updated on major tech events, and receive industry news – directly to your inbox.
Take advantage of our monthly #CareerNav Jobs Edition every first Friday, packed with open tech roles and valuable insights to fuel your success at every level.
Subscribe now at https://lnkd.in/gFAqVpZd#WomenInTech#WWCode#WomenWhoCode
Recruitment Consultant at SoCode US.
1wWhat a man