It's time to ditch the CV: Why tech recruiters are changing how they hire:
More than half of recruiters are open to the idea of eliminating CVs from the hiring process in favour of an increase in skills-based assessments.
That's according to a survey conducted by developer hiring platform CodinGame and technical interview platform CoderPad, which found that recruiters are increasingly wary of the limitations of resumes and other traditional hiring techniques when trying to identify skilled candidates.
The survey argued that removing CVs from the hiring process would help open up the talent pool and make recruitment more diverse. Two-thirds (66%) of technology recruiters said bias is an issue in hiring, with resumes regarded as "a major contributory factor".
[...] Amanda Richardson, CEO of CoderPad, believes the hiring system is broken. "Part of what we're seeing is there are still companies that not only demand a computer science degree, they demand a computer science degree from one of five schools, or someone who's worked at one of five companies," Richardson tells ZDNet.
"No matter how you cut it...there just aren't that many bodies coming into the workforce. The opportunity to be smart about how you're recruiting, looking for skills and walking away from some of those traditional steps, is really a huge culture shift."
The argument for skills-based assessment tools centres on the idea that they remove bias in hiring by allowing employers to determine a candidate's suitability based on their performance alone, as opposed to any information contained within the candidate's CV that could influence a hiring manager's employment decisions.
Thanks to growing interest in coding and the proliferation of coding bootcamps, a computer science degree is no longer a prerequisite for a career in software development. That said, having a formal qualification certainly helps, and a number of major technology firms still insist on their employees having a fundamental grasp of programming theory.
"Both Stanford and MIT teach a class called 'How to Pass the Technical Interview' for credit," says Richardson.
"There's something broken in the world when you're taking a class on how to get the job at arguably the most highly qualified specialized schools in the country."
The good news is that, with technology jobs becoming increasingly platform-based, more companies are willing to hire candidates who can show aptitude in software tools, programming languages and frameworks used by the business.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MostCynical on Monday January 17 2022, @08:38PM (2 children)
Can you code?
not impossible to automate, but not easy
things that are hard to automate:
Can you work well with others?
Can you explain how you can do the work we need you to do?
HR hiring people take the key words from the job description and feed them into online systems like linkedin, seek, jobfinder...if they find 10 or 15 'matches', they invite those people to interview
OR they get a job agency to do this bit, and just interview the 3 or 5 short-listed candidates sent by the agency.
This short listing fundamentally requires the keyword bingo/resume matching.
once you have your shortlist, HR, the line manager, the team lead and maybe a separate pile of management types will all either want to interview (ideally, all at once, but rolling interviews over months are not uncommon)
Adding 'testing' to this will just mean the short list is even shorter, and, when no one suitable is found (because the testing was very good at weeding out people who don'tt 'just do it the way the test required it be done') they will start all over again...
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 5, Touché) by Frosty Piss on Monday January 17 2022, @09:16PM (1 child)
None of the local candidates qualified. Call India.
(Score: 4, Funny) by DannyB on Tuesday January 18 2022, @04:55PM
Dear Mr. White Male
Thank you for applying at mega software corp.
Your qualifications for the position are beyond outstanding. However, we regret that your skin color and gender do not align with the values of our diversity program which is to ensure fairness in hiring.
If you change your skin color and gender, you are welcome to apply again.
Sincerely indifferent,
Mega software corp
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Monday January 17 2022, @09:57PM (5 children)
Musicians applying for jobs audition behind an opaque screen so the decision makers are only influenced by the music.
After they started doing this, the number of women getting musician jobs jumped.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 17 2022, @10:43PM
I feel like there's some sort of agenda in your comment... I can't put my finger on it, though.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 17 2022, @11:02PM (3 children)
Nowadays it seems blind auditions are coming under fire specifically because they work to prevent people from making hiring decisions based on race.
To Make Orchestras More Diverse, End Blind Auditions [nytimes.com] (archived [archive.vn])
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Tuesday January 18 2022, @10:07AM (2 children)
MLK wanted people to be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. Modern liberals are working hard to prevent that.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @01:57PM (1 child)
Yep, and he also was fighting for worker rights, which modern liberals have largely abandoned. Any time a civil rights leader of note starts organizing across such dividing lines, they get assassinated or framed for serious crimes. It's unfortunate how many people don't know what he was doing in Memphis the day he was assassinated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @06:56PM
Conservatives need to stop taking crazy pills!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 17 2022, @10:43PM (2 children)
Assessments? Much of the time it already takes an hour per job site to fill in all the insanely detailed crap they want, now we have to do an "assessment" for each and every one, before we even get to talk to a person?
Fuck this shit.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Tuesday January 18 2022, @01:47AM (1 child)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @05:25AM
I don't know if this observation is germane or not, but I noticed this correlation in my career...
If I was to work directly for the guy who interviewed me, it was a very pleasant interview, and we both were very comfortable with whether or not this was going to be a good fit.
The times I interviewed through some HR type, the whole thing was a mess. For both of us. Especially those tests which had nothing to do with what I do. I build things. I fix things. I design things. I code in Fortran, C++, Assembler. I also design hardware at the component level, analog and digital. I am at home around RF transistors to locomotive SCRs. I have my way of doing things and what tools I use.
I have my own computer which I have my design tools on. I have used it for 20 years. It has cross compilers for the microcontrollers I specialize in, notably the 65C02 and the 68000 series processors. It also runs EAGLE for schematics and PC board Gerber file generation. It runs Mathcad, LT Spice. And scores of tools I have coded over the years for my own use.
All I need is some handshaker tell me all the expertise I invested a lifetime developing won't be usable because I do not code in huge RAD systems I poorly understand and even I know I will likely make buggy code. I hate proprietary IP. Huge fatal single point of failure.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Monday January 17 2022, @10:49PM (5 children)
Tech hiring, and hiring generally, has been a mess for decades. HR weenies so often fall for the flashy loudmouth who fakes confidence and knowledge, and has memorized enough rote knowledge to pass a few tests, and bandy some of the jargon. You'd think knowing about the Dunning-Kruger effect would be Hiring 101. But they can't tell yellow snow from gold.
And that's on those rare occasions when they're actually trying to make an honest hiring decision. So often, they're just going through the motions, to put on an appearance of impartiality. They've already been told the boss's nephew is getting the opening, and their real job is to denigrate all the applicants so that said nephew seems to be the most qualified. Or they are free to go about it honestly, but they're abusing that freedom to indulge their bigotry. Or, what they really want is the cheap H1B slave.
I've had the thrilling experience of listening to an interviewer demolish my resume. He'd ask questions about this and that experience, assert some ridiculous reason why that experience doesn't count-- oh, that was while employed at a university? Academic experience doesn't count! And this one was over a decade ago, we need more current experience, that also doesn't count! -- and poof! I no longer have the minimum experience they claim to need, don't let the door hit my butt on the way out, thanks, buh bye! What a load of bull. The real reason is that they have to screen 100 interviewees for 2 or 3 positions, and are desperately seeking any excuse at all, no matter how feeble, to reject most of the applicants.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @02:01PM
Yep and yet because they discard so many qualified applicants with barely a glance, they wind up with a mountain of resumes from people applying to basically every possible opening to ensure that the 2 or 3% of the applications that do get to an actual hiring manager are enough to get a decent job.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Wednesday January 19 2022, @12:22AM (3 children)
It used to be that one could join a company at the bottom and work their way up eventually to a pretty good position, depending on one's ability to learn and desire to work at it. Companies were glad to provide training and help with additional schooling, as it would make the employees more valuable.
At some point (in the 80's?) companies in general came to hate this, as longevity in a company for an employee means they accrue increased benefits. It became more financially viable, particularly in fields that were exhibiting growth, to hire from the glut of college graduates attracted to that growth. Never mind that they did not have the experience and ability to do the job as well as established employees, they were cheaper. Employees quickly learned that their skills would be more valued at another company, so they started jumping ship at any opportunity to a place where they, in turn, would not have the experience and ability of established employees.
Getting hired became more about the ability to make the proper impression, but good luck figuring out just what that is in any given circumstance.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday January 19 2022, @07:27PM (2 children)
Yes, history is good for perspective. I think employment reflects the circumstances of the moment. We've been coming off the high of our WWII victory. The 1950s was a golden age for the US, with lots of work to be done to rebuild after the ravages of WWII. Victory in the Cold War and the efforts to win that gave us another boost, but not near as much. Easy employment ended with the Dot-com crash. 9/11 brought more work, but it was narrow stuff, pretty much all security and military.
What does the future hold? I believe that if we keep improving at cooperation, and that wisdom thing, the future of all humanity could be very pleasant and fulfilling. We can solve this Global Warming problem, and other problems that may arise. Our civilization could grow and flourish for thousands of years. Could maybe even last for millions of years. Likely, employment as we know it will no longer exist. Or, in the near future, we could lose it. Global Warming is actually not that hard to deal with, but there's a lamentable unwillingness to face even that. Any who think AGW is bad, give a possible WW3 some thought. Perhaps our civilization will collapse, and it will take another 1000 years to learn from our mistakes and a new, better civilization to arise. The grimmest possibility is that we annihilate ourselves, and take all Earthly life with us to the grave, so that whatever other extant species there are now who could have evolved to become as or more intelligent than us never get that chance. Sorry, dolphins. We've grown mighty enough we could maybe do that last one now. 2000 years ago, Rome and China could screw around and destroy themselves without there being the slightest chance of wiping out everyone and everything else. Now though.... What if in 1991 the Soviet Union had decided to go out with a bang, a nice big nuclear bang, rather than a whimper? If by early 1945, the Nazis had developed and produced nuclear weapons, what then? Hitler would certainly have ordered their use. Then things could've hung upon whether the subordinates understood how destructive nuclear weapons were, and were crazy enough to obey such an order, or whether they'd come to their senses and refuse. But then, even if the Nazis had had it, unlike the Soviets 40 years later, they wouldn't have had so much that they could blow up the entire planet. I give kudos to the Soviet Union for not trying it.
Meantime, I guess that one of the root problems is too much liking for dependency. Or, rather, prioritizing various comforts over freedom. Not appreciating and valuing freedom enough. "Put not your faith in princes", but many people so want to do just that, want The Man to look out for them. Also, I think the troubles in employment practices ultimately reflects upon another problem, that we are perhaps overpopulated.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Joe Desertrat on Sunday January 23 2022, @01:32AM
Interesting thoughts, but one of the big problems is that petty tyrants can only thrive if they create an atmosphere of "us against them", and cooperation and wisdom are usually viewed in such circumstances as collaboration with the enemy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 23 2022, @02:16AM
(Score: 2, Insightful) by HammeredGlass on Monday January 17 2022, @11:34PM
You said the magic word!!!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by looorg on Monday January 17 2022, @11:53PM (12 children)
Great, sounds like they are back to doing "quiz"-bullshit again then. Cause Google did it and they are great so if we do it to then we must be great to?
Those pesky child-labor laws tho ... Also if you think a 12 year old can replace a grown up I guess that explains why they can't find people to hire.
Who else would be to blame? It's someone. Seriously companies profiles and ads are like reading a letter to Santa from a small child -- I want everything, things that doesn't even exist, and I want it yesterday and also peace on earth and goodwill towards all mankind and I'm not paying anything worthwhile for it either. Or it could be that HR-people and companies are sort of like lemmings, everyone is just following each other -- they want the same things and all that. So they are left with the only potential recruits are taking or luring them over from someone else. It's the job-application-circle-jerk as a few people jump from place to place to boost their salary and such.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Mykl on Tuesday January 18 2022, @12:18AM (4 children)
Agree. This seems to suggest that there's no difference between a developer and a programmer.
Coding is only one part of the job (I know this may be triggering for some of you). A good developer also needs people skills such as negotiation and managing upward. They also need the ability to get to the root cause of a problem or to the why of a client's change request. I also consider the ability to write well as essential (which is why I still like CVs - it demonstrates their ability to present information in a logical and digestable manner. If I can't read someone's CV without flinching, chances are it will be the same for all of their documents).
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @02:28AM (3 children)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by bradley13 on Tuesday January 18 2022, @10:16AM (1 child)
That depends. In my last industry job, I didn't code, but I was the technical PM. I specifically refused any supervisory authority - I didn't do personnel reviews or set salaries. My job was to protect my developers from the internal customers. I negotiated change requests, clarified requirements, set priorities, and defined what was going to go into development. Specifically so my developers could actually develop.
Not my favorite job ever, but it turned out to be very satisfying. Even the internal customers eventually realized that productivity was way up, once they were forbidden from interrupting the developers all the time...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 23 2022, @02:22AM
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday January 18 2022, @05:23PM
> the ability to tell people to fuck off without getting fired
Do you appreciate how hard that can be? It's not an ability so much as financial security. Younger people in particular don't have that. Financial indentureship is one of the first employment traps an inexperienced new grad can fall into. It's become harder to avoid, thanks to the explosion in student debt.
The young grad with massive student debt who has overextended on the home and car, and has married and/or started a family, so that their life will fall apart if their income is ever cut, is in no position to refuse an unreasonable demand. The product must pass the tests! Stay late to "make it happen" any way you can, wink, wink. Be a real shame if you got a bad review, hint, hint. The bosses won't outright tell the flunkies to falsify the test results, but they leave plenty of hints that to them, fooling everyone, so long as the cheating works, is as good as honest work. If there is cheating, and it's caught, well, sucks to be you, the bosses are absolutely going to hang your sorry butt out to dry, because, you know, they didn't _tell_ you to do that.
Even when the bosses are bluffing with their threats, which is quite frequent, it's really really hard to risk your career on that. Got to have plan B, in case one of those times, they weren't bluffing.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @12:38AM (6 children)
My wife was looking for a new job about 8 years ago. She had a 20+ year resume with lots of demonstrated project management experience. One place, a very large company, seemed very interested in her and she had several interviews. Then they pulled out the "here's an analytical test you need to take," and her reaction was "you can go fuck yourselves." I can't imagine too many good people with lots of experience, meaning they have well developed bullshit detectors, take well to these bullshit requirements. But you are right, it was in the "Google is doing it . . . " phase.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @01:09AM (4 children)
A lot of people seem to have 20+ years of experience in project management, without having gained any ability to manage projects.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @02:55AM (1 child)
I see you're one of those deadweights who walk their coffee mugs from cube to cube complaining about the project managers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @07:27AM
complaining about the other project managers.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Tuesday January 18 2022, @09:07AM (1 child)
OTOH how would ability to manage projects be demonstrated by an "analytical test"
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @07:51PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @02:04PM
There's a bunch of people out there with the same year of experience 20 times as opposed to folks that have 20 years of experience. I don't relish the idea of taking a test to get a job, but by the same token, what else do you do to exclude people that were doing just well enough to be fired and where the company couldn't get rid of them? At the end of the day, there needs to be some way of dealing with the fact that an increasing share of employers won't do much beyond confirming dates and titles when references are requested.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @07:02PM (1 child)
"No matter how you cut it...there just aren't that many bodies coming into the workforce."
That's because public "school" has continued to totally and spectacularly fail kids for many decades.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @07:54PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 18 2022, @08:22PM
Most interviews already include a technical portion, where there's a bit of hands on shared editor/compiler. The quality varies greatly. While I'm sure recruiters would love to pre-can this step, and provide the perfect candidate, nobody wants to do this just to get to the real interview, and recruiters are not qualified to assess such a phase, both because if they were, they would be working for higher pay as a programmer themselves, and because they don't work at the company they are hiring for, so they cannot assess properly. At best, they could provide a very mild and uniform test to distinguish between non-programmers and actual programmers, but that would end up with answers posted on whatever website, so nice try. Also keep in mind, this is a survey, co-sponsored by two platforms that specialize in providing the tools for this step, so yes they would love if their tools were used more widely, and recruiters are the next logical market for such tools.
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday January 19 2022, @04:53AM
Should we perhaps better start with doctors and/or pilots? After all, their skill set is easier to test.
Think I am joking? Recall that Boeing 737 MAX was killed by software.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.