This goes back to my point about the status of the profession -- if we're being compared to cooks and service technicians, you know times are going to be rough for us. I'd rather be compared to a lawyer...and make closer to what they make...what we do is no less complex.
> This is a very interesting discussion. I believe in being able to > obtain the best person for the job, but I'm not sure that creating a > standardize programming test is the best way. Or to devise some trick > questions. It reminds me of academic hazing constructed to make the > instructor look smart. > > If you were going to hire a personal cook, you would go by > recommendations and actually sample what they can prepare based on > the kind of meals you desire. A cook passing a test about the use of > appliances and what's the best way to melt butter doesn't mean they > are going to be able to make the Weight Watchers® meat-loaf the way > you like it. You would have the candidate cook prepare some meals for > you and ask for their feed back on real questions like, "We eat many > chicken dishes, what do you recommend?". This would also give you a > chance to see if this person is not only able to prepare a meal to > your liking but if they are a good resource for you as well. Before I > push this any further, I don't have a cook, don't know how to cook, > but I know what I would want if I was going to hire one cause it > would be based on what they actually have to do on the job. A > certified cook doesn't mean much if they can't make White Chocolate > Mousse on-demand. :-) > > Bringing this back to programming, webmastering, or service > tech'ing. :-) You want to hire a webmaster. Make a list of the kinds > of things you wish to have a webmaster do on the job most of their > time. If the job is to be able to re-partition disks or change > content on a corporate web site using a popular open source CMS > (Joomla), then I feel those are the things that should be asked of a > candidate to demonstrate in front of a work station. If most of their > job will be installing new software and configuring a system then set- > up some systems with packages for them to do this. This is assuming > if you can't entirely trust the recommendations for this person or if > you simply want to see if they can do what you need them to do > specifically. If the candidate doesn't know how to do something and > looks on the web to figure it out, and is still able to get the job > done in a reasonable amount of time than I consider this a plus, > because someone who is resourceful and works this way on the job is > better than someone who only knows what they have been shown to do. > Syntax examples of most things are only a few clicks away. > > At the very least, a candidate should walk away from the interview > feeling that they were actually being evaluated for what they would > have to do on the job. If they had difficulty it would be obvious to > them on what areas they need to improve on and realize why they > weren't offered a job. As for the hiring manager, you want to feel > confident that the person you hire can do the real job and if they > have successfully demonstrated performing small work tasks you will > know for sure. > > David Roth > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > New York PHP Community Talk Mailing List > http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk > > NYPHPCon 2006 Presentations Online > http://www.nyphpcon.com > > Show Your Participation in New York PHP > http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php > > _______________________________________________ New York PHP Community Talk Mailing List http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk NYPHPCon 2006 Presentations Online http://www.nyphpcon.com Show Your Participation in New York PHP http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php
