I’m a software engineer who sometimes interviews other software engineers. I’m not given a script to go off of, I get to ask them whatever I want. Usually we just talk about technology and coding from a high level. I’m not a big fan of whiteboard tests.
I’ve noticed, however, that a lot of people applying to software engineering jobs feel very alien to me. I started coding when I was 12 and spent most of my teenage years on technology forums. A lot of people applying to these positions are very much ladder-climbing type people who got into the career for the money. Working with these people is an absolute drag.
We also interview for “culture fit”. I would like to add in a single question to my interviews to assess that: what is your favorite science fiction book. You don’t even have to have read it recently, you just have to have read one and formed an opinion on it. My thoughts
Pros:
- Weeds out a lot of people since half of Americans don’t read books at all.
- Theoretically filters out people who love this kind of tech subculture from people who are just in it for the money
Cons:
- It’s unfair to people who enjoy fantasy novels, or any other form of fiction
- Being motivated by money probably shouldn’t be a disqualifying factor (I certainly wouldn’t do this job for free), I’m just tired of working with yuppies and lashing out at poor unsuspecting Jr Devs
I’m half-hearted on this. I see why it could be considered unfair but I’m really tired of the kinds of people I work with.
Not that I said “read theory” not “make applicants take personality tests”.
“Needs the same kind of people is demonstrably stupid”… yet OP is headed in that direction and doesn’t appear to be stupid. Just lacking in exposure to other ways of doing things… thus reading about them is a way to close that knowledge gap
Leadership type books aren’t to be followed 100%. They are written for a person to take the 10% that best applies and is helpful to them. It’s why they’re so damn repetitive and obvious the more experience you have.
The takeaway is not “build a team of four people with these four styles”. That’s way too literal. It’s “see the value in a mix of people, and recognize strengths in others that you don’t have”.
Ah, that’s a much better take.