[hhas01]

True dat, but what does “must have 20 years’ experience with $technology” even mean? Using it day-in, day-out, for the last 20 years? Originally learning it 20 years ago, and periodically brushing up on the current release every few years when a project for which it’s actually appropriate lands on your desk? Or one year of experience, repeated 20 times?

Beyond indicating a degree of experience in the hiring company’s primary development language and perhaps a couple major libraries, it really is a worthless measure of anything, except perhaps of middle management that doesn’t understand shit about what it is it’s meant to be managing. Like I said, programmer attitudes are a part of the problem.

But I’m preaching to the choir here. If it’s any consolation, if was hiring I would rate Ability to Learn way more highly. As I observed on another thread recently:

“The key to being a competent software developer is really, really simple: Learn the Business. Because if you can’t/won’t/don’t understand the problem domain, how can you expect to solve problems in it?”

If what the company does require an “exotic” or bespoke language to beat its competitors, that’s just one more work tool to be learnt and used (and maybe learn from) for the duration, and price yourself accordingly.

[Koshkin]

But how would you test a candidate for their "Ability to Learn"?

[hhas01]

Good question, and I think it reveals an embarrassing truth about common hiring practices: they’re designed to test for qualities that can be trivially tested for, rather than qualities that are actually productive down on the shop floor.

I suspect the best you can do at is read between the lines on the resume and ask searching questions at interview, searching for indicators that the candidate is an active and competent learner, not merely an effective chair warmer. Someone who shows an eagerness to step outside her comfort zone; who makes a point of talking with, and learning from, her users. Beyond that, well, that’s why new hires have probationary/trial periods, so that our initial guestimates of her abilities can be tested in battle.

Of course, all this presupposes you have a management and HR culture that expects managers and HR to know enough about computer programming and software development to be able to ask the right questions and make qualitative judgements on the responses. And, needless to say, just as there are way too many coders who don’t give a shit about anything except coding, there are way too many managers with zero clue how to do anything other than manage.

But if you don’t know jack about what it is you’re meant to be managing, how do you possibly expect to manage it effectively?

See also:

https://i.redd.it/vhoy65xmfegz.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CpsutgxUIAE2h3i.jpg