Appropriate Interviewing For a Worldwide Search? 440
Posted
by
ScuttleMonkey
from the can't-please-everyone-so-i-choose-to-please-no-one dept.
from the can't-please-everyone-so-i-choose-to-please-no-one dept.
jellomizer writes 'I am a manager of a small Software Development department, looking to hire some more developers. By edict of the CEO, the search must be made globally, so we are dealing with different cultures and different ideas of truth and embellishment, etc. To try to counteract this, we give the potential employees tests where I watch what they do, to see if they actually know what they say they know. However, it seems a lot of applicants drop out when I mention that this test is mandatory. Is this a sign that we caught them in a lie, or are we weeding out good people where we shouldn't be? Would you be willing to take a test as part of an interview? If so, is there any type of heads up you would like to know beforehand to make the decision of whether to take the test easier?' What other difficulties have people seen while trying to hire from many different cultures?
Stay put on factual tests and questions (Score:5, Informative)
In our company, we work with offshore programmers.
Our selection process includes a mandatory test, during which we assess the candidate on several points, mostly: IT Skills, ability to understand requirements, motivation. In order to avoid cultural issues, we tend to focus on facts and we try to avoid questions which may lead to a culturally biased answer. For instance, we would ask: "please explain me how you will implement such feature" instead of "did you understand what I mean".
The test is a simple project, and the candidate can work on it at his/her own pace. They are followed by a project manager as in a real work environment. Its duration is normally one week as candidates usually have a day job. We renumerate the candidates for the test they take with us.
The recruitment process has been found to be effective in most cases, allowing to effectively select quality programmers. We found that there are enough programmers ready to go through our selection process for us not to worry about the one refusing to take a test.
Re:Good developers dont have time to take many tes (Score:5, Informative)
Re:90 day probey (Score:2, Informative)
Sucks for the employees though. At least 90days of no benefits, paid holidays, or vacation time.
Re:Good developers dont have time to take many tes (Score:4, Informative)
Totally, if you are offering less than current_income + 10%, why should the interviewee waste his time?
Re:90 day probey (Score:3, Informative)
My company does this too. It's 4 months and through a temp agency. I hated it but I needed the job. From the employers standpoint it's a great way to go. The headhunter does all the work finding people who "qualify". You interview those who rose to the top and bring them on. Since it's through an agency you don't have to incur all the expense of hiring someone and all the HR work. If they work out we bring them on.
The agency we use provides some benefits at a reasonable cost but it's certainly not like what the full time employees make. If you're going after someone who's highly sought after I wouldn't go this route. Someone else will give them a better option. But in this market, the employer holds the cards. Go ahead and make them suffer a bit. There's a lot of hungry people out there who will do it if it means work that pays.
Re:A good test (Score:3, Informative)
Remember that the recruiting is Worldwide: how do you hire someone with no work authorization for 30 days ? Would you relocate to a foreign country for 30 days ? If I get similar offers the one where they say "you're hired, when can you start" and the one "we'll try you for thirty day, then if we don't like you return to your country" it's pretty obvious which one I will pick: a little bit more potential money is not worth a much bigger risk. How do you know the company is not hiring 3 candidates for 30 days, meaning that not only you have to do a good job, but you're still competing with 2 other guys and have a high risk to be unemployed at the end of the trial.
For example a few years ago I refused a 12% bigger offer for a more stable company which actually was quicker to make the offer. When I look back, I have no regrets: the better paying company had massive layoffs and is now sleeping with M$. The company I picked has great perks to help offset the lower base salary.