(Replying to PARENT post)
> Experienced engineers who perform better than a recent graduate are usually not interviewing. They have jobs that pay them extremely well.
Doubtful. There is constant churn in tech, as the best way to get a raise is to switch jobs. It's well documented that junior/senior engineers (and beyond) switch jobs, on average, every 2-3 years. Longer tenures are generally favored due to vesting schedules (though I've had several friends ditch Amazon before the [iirc] 4-year cliff).
👤dvt🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Exactly. People who are good are always going to be referrals, once they've worked at a few places, their networks are just not going to let them get away. The only times I've found where you are interviewing someone experienced who turns out good is
1) someone coming from a big corporate job where they were undervalued/underutilized
2) someone coming from a different region, different country, where they have no local network
👤jmchuster🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Sounds nice and awfully convenient for those supporting the current interviewing practices. But does this apply to all experienced engineers, 50%, 5% ? US only, Europe, Russia, India?
We need better proof and better data than a 2006 blog post.
👤blub🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
There's an adverse selection problem with interviewing, in that people who are good tend to disappear from the labor market and when they do appear on the labor market they get snapped up quickly. New grads don't have this adverse selection effect: there is a very good reason why they don't already have a job. This is why companies invest so much in internships: this will often be the only time to snap up a promising young developer before they start building a career at your competitor.
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/09/06/finding-great-deve...