Father Christmas wrote:

Seriously 90% - so out of 10 applications for a developer role you get only one who can actually program? OK - you live in a different world to me!

Seriously. He's not kidding. I've had the exact same experience. OK, you know your own abilities & get annoyed when asked to demonstrate them after you've already gone to the trouble of documenting them in your CV, somewhat understandable. Have you ever advertised a position & actually had everyone you interviewed live up to their CV? Sure many get weeded out at that time but time is money. Every member of the interview panel has now wasted the entire time reserved for that interview when it could have been spent on productive endeavours. Think about it from the employer's perspective & a few sensible precautions/hurdles for prospective applicants starts to make sense.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Father Christmas wrote:

if I am stupid enough to accept the position when I can't do the job, then O will be sacked - an inconvenience to you, but a potential disaster for an employee.

An employee taking on a job they know quite well they are under-qualified for, gets a minimum of about 6 weeks income at a level they have not earned and also likely plenty of warning/clues that it's not going to last (yes, employment contracts with a probationary period still include minimum termination notice clauses). Unless the employee ruins their own reputation by touting what they've gotten away with, where's the disaster? On the other hand, an employer defrauded in this manner has already made a massive investment: the time taken by business management & the development team (HR goes without saying, but costs more if - e.g. in small business - HR is an auxiliary function of management): 1) To evaluate CVs 2) Interviews 3) Post Interview analysis 4) as many iterations of 2) & 3) as necessary to select the best candidate(s) 5) Induction 6) Ramp-up training 7) The wages of the unacceptable employee over the probationary period. For the right employee(s), it's a good investment. For the wrong one(s), that's a disaster. The original investment is lost and the whole cycle begins again with all the same risks and expenses (sure there are CV's still on file from round 1 but someone who is still on the market 3 months later - typical probation - is likely not a good choice either). In addition, while the advertised role remains unfilled, the development team is understaffed, resulting in overtime costs &/or project overrun. Sure there can be other reasons for a hire not working out, but an employer that doesn't take every possible step to ensure that the candidate(s) it hires can perform the work as expected is a huge risk-taker and an employer I would bet on going out of business sooner or later.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Kevin McFarlane wrote:

But I detest having tech tests delivered via the agency rather than at the employer.

Fair enough too. We ask for code samples but wouldn't dream of having a recruitment agency evaluate them. There's enough "programmers" out there who can't write code, I can't imagine why anyone would think a recruitment agent would have the ability to distinguish good code from bad.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

danialgibson wrote:

Because they don't know how to tell a good developer from a bad developer. If you take their test and fail then you're bad (which is not correct but is they way they'd see it).

That's not all there is to it, see below:

danialgibson wrote:

If you want to work at this company then you'd probably be ok taking the test, however meaningless it is. If you don't really care for the company then don't apply for the position (and thus the test actually did serve a purpose). Quote Selected Text

Absolutely :-D We always ask for sample code from prospective developers, nothing demanding.* There are several objectives behind it: 1) Establish whether the applicant can actually write code/analyse & solve a problem (I've encountered many people with impressive-looking CV's who can't). 2) Give us a glimpse of their thought processes (you'd be surprised how creative some people can be on the simplest of tasks, some make mountains out of molehills, some have surprised & impressed with how simply & elegantly they solve an already simple task). 3) Determine the applicant's level of motivation/enthusiasm (we want motivated people who take an interest in what we do, if they're not motivated enough to perform a very simple task to get the job, they're not likely to be motivated to put much into their work). 4) Eliminate anyone who can't follow simple instructions (the vast majority of applicants simply see a job ad & automatically send off their CV without taking the time to consider where they're applying to or what they'll be doing if they actually get the job - we don't want to hire mindless automatons, or waste our time interviewing them). * For a task where the typical solution was less than 40 lines of code (including declarations & comments), we had one response with "... Given that this task will require a fair amount of work ... assuming that I meet or exceed your criteria ...". My response to that was: If you think this task requires a "fair amount of work", I can guarantee that you do not meet, let alone exceed, our criteria.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Allen Anderson wrote:

would keep my email on the server and cache it locally (but do it a lot better than exchange server does)

I know these guys have some of what you're talking about, not sure about all of it but they might eventually get there: http://www.thinctechnology.com/[^]

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

developer6 wrote:

I'm still developing in and supporting it

Wow, a clipper programmer who hasn't moved over to VO, I'm impressed! Good move :-D .

developer6 wrote:

I fail to see the funny side!!!

Sympathies. Many years ago I was recruited to write C code to integrate into a clipper program & ended up working quite a lot in clipper as well. After a while the whole shop moved over to VO X| Never did understand why the language allowed the caller to decide whether or not to pass parameters by value or by reference :confused: .

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

shubumpkin wrote:

the coding world is far more advanced in terms of processes and standards than many other industries

Yes! It has so many to choose from! :laugh:

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Gary Wheeler wrote:

There is no tool out there that would allow all of you to edit the same project file simultaneously and maintain its consistency and correctness.

I've found SVN+Tortoise manages this quite well actually. VS project files are text-based so merges happen seamlessly and even in the rare cases where two or more developers accidentally work on exactly the same chunk of code/project section, conflicts can be resolved manually.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

JDL-EPM wrote:

someone put the contents of a 60000 (imperial) gallon vat on the floor...

:((

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

JimmyRopes wrote:

Reusability is the third biggest lie. It is up there with: 1. I love you 2. I ... err, maybe we should skip number two.

2. I'll call you Or are you thinking of something not-kid-sister-safe? :-D

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

El Corazon wrote:

I actually had someone tell me there is only one Agile. I said, no, we are a cross of several.

Um, isn't Agile just a collection of techniques/strategies/processes that you pick & choose from as appropriate for any given project? So there's no one Agile, or even several Agiles but rather, Agile encompasses a vast multitude of possible project development methodologies? So in a sense, there is only one Agile ('coz Agile covers so many things). Or am I missing something?

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

Of course, certain other industries require a certain level of deviance.

Personally, I think the software industry as a whole has earned it's reputation for budget/timeline blowouts from the ingenuousness of the stereotypical programmer types who pioneered the field (who would actually state how long they initially think a project is going to take - must admit, I still do this too often :-O ). 'Bout time we learned to be as underhanded as every other profession :-D .

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

tec-goblin wrote:

Vengaboys, Smile.dk, Eiffel 65, Funny all the way! ;P

Don't forget O-Zone: Numa! Numa! (with the original film-clip[^], with Gary Brolsma[^] or my favourite: Lego[^] - doesn't matter) :-D Excuse me while I just ... Miyaa hee! Miyaa hoo! Miyaa ha! Miyaa ha-ha! (Makes the best ring-tone ever ;P ).

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

modified on Tuesday, November 4, 2008 8:24 AM

Shog9 wrote:

"Killing me softly" / Fugees

Saw a benefit(?) concert video many years ago where Roberta Flack joined the Fugees on stage for this. Lauryn Hill sounded like cr*p warmed over but gradually improved as the song progressed. Roberta stepped onto the stage in full voice from the first note & totally humiliated her :laugh: . Didn't especially like the Fugees before, couldn't stand to listen to them at all after.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

John C wrote:

Our lips are sealed by the Go-go's

Don't you mean "Alex the Seal". Seriously, my brother put that in my head when I was about 10 & to this day I can't hear that song without mouthing "Alex the Seal" during the chorus :-O .

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Michael Martin wrote:

Kylie Minogue +

Michael Martin wrote:

+ I'd give her some.

Dalek Dave wrote:

I'd give her ALL!

But she's so little! ;P

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Squirrel Hacker wrote:

working 12 hours a day ... seems excessive to me

Only work 12hrs a day for yourself, never for someone else - unless you're getting a REALLY good overtime allowance &/or time off in lieu. (Exceptions to this are things like mining & oil rig work where your number of days on are about the same as your days off - but that's effectively both good overtime + time off in lieu anyway). Up to 50 hrs/week is pretty common/standard in professions in US/UK/Australia/Japan (yay for mainland Europe where they've long-since cottoned on to how overtime reduces productivity!) but over 50hrs/wk is really pushing it. If they're telling you there's no work for you if you don't work 12hrs/day without overtime (or even just hinting at it) & trying to tell you you won't get better conditions anywhere else, I can virtually guarantee they're trying to exploit you. If that's the way they treat you while you're in your probationary period (& you should use that time to evaluate them as much as they evaluate you!), it's not going to get any better in a permanent position. Move on, but don't bitch about your old boss during interviews - even if the interviewer knows them by reputation & leads you into commenting on them - just say your old position wasn't right for you, & if pressed, say you'd rather not comment on it further.

Squirrel Hacker wrote:

Is that a scare tactic employers usually use on the new guys

Only unscrupulous ones - and not just on the new guys.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Trollslayer wrote:

My suggestion - look for something better!

Estimated employment rate in the Philippines is between 10 & 20%, there is nothing better.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

leckey wrote:

I understand that, but when someone who has much less training that you gets your job for a fraction of the salary, you will understand my position.

But direct your rage appropriately, it's the bean-counters who under-value your worth who are to blame, not the poor girl who is just trying to get/keep a job. When a job goes out to tender & some cowboy outfit/contractor quotes low, wins it, then botches it, you blame the company/govt. department for it's poor decision, not the cowboy(s) trying to earn some money. Same principle applies.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds

Fabio Franco wrote:

Also many american companies that settles in poor foreign countries to explore exploit low pay employees have americans in management and high pay positions.

It's not just Americans, unscrupulous people come from all over the world. A couple of years ago I went to the Philippines to on-site train staff in the software I was developing at the time & the experience was a real eye-opener. In developed countries, things look bad when you reach 10% unemployment. As I understand it the Philippines has an estimated employment rate of between 10 & 20%, generating a culture of fear in those who do have a job & a willingness to accept poor pay & conditions out of sheer necessity. One employed person will most likely be supporting an entire extended family, so job loss has extreme consequences. By greasing the right palms & structuring their companies the right way (a local is usually nominated as the "owner" of the company but somehow left with no executive power & little more job security than a regular employee), "rich" foreign employers get to live like kings in gated compounds alongside the corrupt officials who allow it to happen. I'm no economist but I can see it's a tricky situation. With the exploitation & corruption so entrenched, cleaning it all up would likely do more harm than good (to employment figures) in the short to medium term & the long term (possibly even generations away) is hard to see while worrying about how to feed a family right now.

T-Mac-Oz "When I'm ruler of the universe ... I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are. It turns out to be a non-trivial problem." - Linus Torvalds