Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What a great read. I've recently run the gauntlet on interviewing and I'm acutely aware of all of these. I only have one issue which is about the section on "Candidate showed a lack of passion".

I'm completely passionate about development. I do freelance work, I build stuff outside of my 9-5 job, I go to conferences and meet-ups locally. But I know developers who are much better JavaScript and Ruby guys than me. They have more experience, but don't do nearly the same amount of stuff outside of work that I do. Does that "lack of passion" about the industry and their profession make them a less worthy candidate than myself?



Yeah, I was uncomfortable with that too. There are two sets of people I know: Folks of the kind that you mentioned who are incredibly good programmers but who have other interests outside life. In fact one of the smartest coworkers I knew spent half his time at work and the other half time in a band and he was extremely productive. Another group are the people who have a personality which doesn't exude visible signals for passion: They probably never hang out at meetup groups or conferences, but they quietly hack away in their own time without tweeting about it or whatever. From a macro perspective they are "passionate" for sure but are susceptible to false negatives especially in the highly noisy interview setup.


A lot has been written about passion lately, and even another recent blog post of mine is relevant (http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/04/17/how-employers-measure-...). I don't think passion has to be demonstrated by 'only' doing coding 24 hours a day, or going to meetups every day. I know very good technologists who don't attend meetups or hackathons, but you can tell in how they talk about technology that they have passion. It's hard to quantify, but I think for the most part good companies tend to get it right more often than not.


Good question. I think in time, those who love what they do will generally catch up 'skills-wise' to those that do what they do only for dollars. Being a worthy candidate with less skills is a possibility - perhaps you will work harder or longer than they will, which could make you more productive. I would say that many companies may hire someone like you over someone with a bit more experience and less passion, as the long term investment is potentially better. If it were a 6 week contract, I'll take the other guy - for a salaried perm job, you may be a better choice.


Depends on type of work (demands of cog on enterprise team vs get startup over the "hump" are different).

But, in general if you're hiring for long term, the passionate, growing candidate will surpass the superior but stagnant candidate.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: