Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ytdytvhxgydvhh 880 days ago
Didn’t end up going to work for the friend, but the situation still strained the friendship.

An engineer I worked with for several years (and became friends with outside of work) started his own company, a couple of years later he recruited me to join as his business was taking off. He’d also brought in a business guy who seemed to put in lots of processes including a mandatory take-home coding assignment as part of their interview process.

So anyhow, this guy who I’d worked alongside for years, who’d seen plenty of my code and wanted me to join his company, was going to make me do this homework to get an offer.

So I did a verrry basic solution to this thing and sent it back. A bit later I got an email from someone in their office that they regretted they didn’t have any positions that fit my experience.

Later my friend (and his wife) encouraged me to do the homework thing again but I laughed them off. I didn’t want to work for a small company that somehow had hamstrung itself with unnecessary processes that kept the founder from hiring someone he wanted to hire.

A few years later they sold and a couple engineers I know made multiple millions. So yeah, I dunno, I felt good about my decision at the time, but in retrospect it would have been better to act like any job seeker and just go to work for my friend.

Your mileage will certainly vary.

6 comments

> So anyhow, this guy who I’d worked alongside for years, who’d seen plenty of my code and wanted me to join his company, was going to make me do this homework to get an offer.

Had your friend delegated the engineering hiring decisions/process to someone else, and was trying not to step on their toes?

Or friend had instituted the process, and didn't think it would go well with the other people, if you looked like a nepotism hire who bypassed the process?

Or friend was trying to put you in your employee place (where you had to meet his process), or otherwise was getting a bit full of himself, or a bit sleep-deprived and nutty?

> Or friend was trying to put you in your employee place (where you had to meet his process), or otherwise was getting a bit full of himself, or a bit sleep-deprived and nutty?

This would be a strange take. CEO shouldn't be letting people in on the nod. If hiring is someone else's job, CEO shouldn't be overriding. At best suggesting candidates but saying that it's totally the hiring manager's call.

If a candidate didn't pass a hiring process because they didn't put effort in as they felt they should get the job due to connections, I would agree with the company's decision.

The purpose of a hiring process (as in take home assignment) is to see that the person is competent to do the job. It was already established that he was. So following a formal process is a stupid waste of time (on both ends) that has nothing to do with strengthening the company and is simply an unnecessary ego trip. The company disqualified itself.
How was it established?
They mean it was established by the CEO's experience with him as an engineer.

To the company it was never, and as high a recommendation as the CEO would be; most people would agree they did the right thing. Unless you're hired before a hiring manager or whomever is doing the hiring you should follow the process. If you treat it like a joke because you feel entitled by your connections then be willing to accept the outcome.

You are describing the HR person's ego trip.

That person should be fired, for being unprofessional and for inability to adapt to a trivial non-standard situation ("normally we test the applicant's technical competency with a take-home test; now it already has been established; so I need to stop wasting everybody's time and spend my time doing something actually useful".)

Obviously, HR could still be useful in establishing a culture fit, but even then it's pretty much a formality since the CEO worked with and recommended the guy.

If I was a hiring manager who set up a hiring process to evaluate candidates, and someone did poorly on it but the CEO came and said "no no, hire this person anyway, I know they failed but it's fine" I would quit.
It's one possibility, and I would bet money that it happens sometimes. I itemized it last because it seems the least-likely of those possibilities.

I think it's kinda intuitive that this could happen. Startups tend to require early people to figure out and apply a ton of diverse skills. You can guess many founders will think "I'm hiring my friend, and I don't know how the power dynamic will work out". And some percentage of those will then think, "...so I should establish from the start that they're the employee, to avoid problems later." And from there you get the dance-for-our-approval tests that so many techbros have cargo-culted.

Tbf the hiring already said they don't have the position open, and rather than doing something about it, the CEO asked OP to make another homework, which is also not a guarantee. Another round of interview may be fine, but another homework, that's laughable.

OTOH, it may be that the company already have one or some super programmer, that he/she carry the company to success. Having OP, if we assume is another super programmer, may halt the company rather than improve it.

Separate from whether the process was any good, your friend wasn't necessarily wrong not to make you an exception to it. Nepotism can be pretty rough on a team's morale.
Programmers are the least capable engineers but the most cocksure and entitled

Am an EE and I cannot stand the CS people at work. Oh you wrapped well known math in machine syntax sugar, none of which you invented, or defined? High 5, edgelord.

If I was another employee or applicant, I would be legitimately upset if someone didn't have to jump through the same hoops that I did simply because he knew the boss.
That's insane. My CEO is 60 years old and has built and sold 4 different companies before this. His network of former colleagues is deep. It would be childish for me to believe all of the potential people from his former working relationships should be beholden to the exact same homework assignments as someone who is a complete stranger.
Yeah, if I were someone working at a company having gone through the "normal" hiring process and then someone new joined my team and I found out they didn't have to go through it because they thought it was a waste of time and they were friends with the founder, that would feel pretty shitty.
it depends on their previous relationship. if they have worked together before then the test should be redundant. so why should i feel bothered that they didn't have to do a test?
If the founder is not really involved with the hiring team then you are essentially going over them without them having any idea how you work.

While I know what you're saying that the founder is vouching for your experience, its still going to cause friction, I think. Especially, again, to all the people that fought for the job.

sure, i am thinking of cases where the founder is still involved with hiring, and especially more so, where the founder is the lead developer and still coding.

i agree with you that once the company is large enough that the founder is no longer involved with hiring decisions then they should not just go over the hiring team.

more specifically, as in this article: https://www.cio.com/article/236189/5-reasons-ceos-should-be-...

i am talking about smaller companies that don't yet have senior management and HR teams

Did you ask them if they were advised by HR/legal to do these tests to everyone to avoid possible future discrimination lawsuits?
That is such a bizarre story.
I can see your perspective, and it would be reasonable for them to say, "I already know this guy's work. He doesn't have to do the take-home.", which is not like saying, "I already know this guy from [irrelevant source]." I would do this, and have before.

You also could have just smiled and nodded and actually done a good job to demonstrate your skills. It looks to me like you pulled your punches.

Was it 10, 100 employees at the time?