Harj Taggar Is Building a New Technical Hiring Pipeline with TripleByte(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
Harj Taggar Is Building a New Technical Hiring Pipeline with TripleByte
http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/07/triplebyte/
133 comments
Something I've been thinking about for a long time - I'll add this here because you and others at HN are more likely to be able to act on it than I am.
It seems to me that hiring teams of programmers that are known to work well together and have proven track records is a smart idea. The reason is that hiring individual programmers, who may or may not get along with one another, and whose individual hire decisions may or may not cover the breadth needed or may result in redundancies - is an inefficient and strange practice.
What if you needed an IT department and could hire groups of programmers who have, collectively, proven track records of managing IT well? Need a website done? Yeah, you could hire a designer, a backend server woman, a database guy, a CMS guru - and hope they all get along well and work together.
Or we could imagine hiring a team of people who manage themselves to get the result you're asking for.
Dunno. Zany idea.
It seems to me that hiring teams of programmers that are known to work well together and have proven track records is a smart idea. The reason is that hiring individual programmers, who may or may not get along with one another, and whose individual hire decisions may or may not cover the breadth needed or may result in redundancies - is an inefficient and strange practice.
What if you needed an IT department and could hire groups of programmers who have, collectively, proven track records of managing IT well? Need a website done? Yeah, you could hire a designer, a backend server woman, a database guy, a CMS guru - and hope they all get along well and work together.
Or we could imagine hiring a team of people who manage themselves to get the result you're asking for.
Dunno. Zany idea.
That's basically the idea behind a lot of talent acquisitions.
Also the idea behind hiring a VP of Engineering (at a startup) who'll bring in his previous team(s).
It happens naturally to a degree in a top down fashion. Newly hired executes / directors / managers often bring in their own people.
> We'd love to hear any ideas for more experiments we could run.
As much as possible, persist the interview results per-candidate and make them reusable so people don't have to re-do the same work over and over and over again. One of the worst parts of interviewing is answering the same basic CS 101 question in every interview because everybody reads the same "how to interview a programmer" post written 15 years ago. Yes, 22 year old interviewer, I know what a compiler is, what an open source license is, what linux is, and how to write a linked list. Also, I've written code for NASA, but you have no basis to evaluate that against your limited knowledge and life experience, so keep asking things you learned two years ago.
I looked into doing something like this a while ago. The long term goal is obviously to become a candidate marketplace where you hold all the quality cards and charge a fee to companies who want a pre-vetted, guaranteed ("our programmers are warrantied against hip dysplasia!") employee pool.
The end result is essentially credentialing/certification where companies only want to hire people "Certified by X." Then, those people can also job hop easier because they are "certified" and don't have to repeat the same interview process everywhere again. Mild speed bumps in credentialing end up being: re-certification (sure I know all this now, but I may not remember any of it 6 months later), bleeding-edge certification (do you even react-goober-swift?), and maintenance certification ("I know this 20 year old technology nobody else knows!").
The reason special people will run away screaming: we don't want to be treated as interchangeable cogs. We are unicorn pony snowflakes. We want our $30k/week contracts and don't need to be evaluated by another programmer's static scripts pseudo-determining what they think is a fair evaluation of our bespoke, artisanal knowledge and abilities.
As much as possible, persist the interview results per-candidate and make them reusable so people don't have to re-do the same work over and over and over again. One of the worst parts of interviewing is answering the same basic CS 101 question in every interview because everybody reads the same "how to interview a programmer" post written 15 years ago. Yes, 22 year old interviewer, I know what a compiler is, what an open source license is, what linux is, and how to write a linked list. Also, I've written code for NASA, but you have no basis to evaluate that against your limited knowledge and life experience, so keep asking things you learned two years ago.
I looked into doing something like this a while ago. The long term goal is obviously to become a candidate marketplace where you hold all the quality cards and charge a fee to companies who want a pre-vetted, guaranteed ("our programmers are warrantied against hip dysplasia!") employee pool.
The end result is essentially credentialing/certification where companies only want to hire people "Certified by X." Then, those people can also job hop easier because they are "certified" and don't have to repeat the same interview process everywhere again. Mild speed bumps in credentialing end up being: re-certification (sure I know all this now, but I may not remember any of it 6 months later), bleeding-edge certification (do you even react-goober-swift?), and maintenance certification ("I know this 20 year old technology nobody else knows!").
The reason special people will run away screaming: we don't want to be treated as interchangeable cogs. We are unicorn pony snowflakes. We want our $30k/week contracts and don't need to be evaluated by another programmer's static scripts pseudo-determining what they think is a fair evaluation of our bespoke, artisanal knowledge and abilities.
I think the idea of judging people primarily on strengths is key. But I think you actually understate this, when you say on the FAQ that 'Everyone's bad at something' -- in the sense that the amount of skills, knowledge, and abilities that any one person lacks is essentially infinite.
People analytics is a fascinating problem and I think it's high time someone tried to introduce concrete data to it. Several companies are tackling it in their own ways.
At http://InterviewKickstart.com, for example, we're starting to find some interesting correlations between personal confidence-level of an engineer coming in, and their employability. Yet another correlation is between academic achievements and employability. Small data, but interesting still.
At http://InterviewKickstart.com, for example, we're starting to find some interesting correlations between personal confidence-level of an engineer coming in, and their employability. Yet another correlation is between academic achievements and employability. Small data, but interesting still.
Congrats on launching Harj.
Have you any plans to extend beyond the Technical assessment to help quantify "a good fit with the mission and team"? I'm working with a couple of companies doing interesting things in that behavioural space - and would be fascinated to see outcomes in that field from your data-driven approach. Good luck to you Guillaume and Ammon.
Have you any plans to extend beyond the Technical assessment to help quantify "a good fit with the mission and team"? I'm working with a couple of companies doing interesting things in that behavioural space - and would be fascinated to see outcomes in that field from your data-driven approach. Good luck to you Guillaume and Ammon.
Thanks! We're going to focus on technical assessment for the a while because 1) it's already a big challenge itself 2) it feels more quantifiable than culture and mission fit. We're going to let the companies decide on those things for now, but we definitely agree all parts of the process could benefit from more data.
> First, track decisions as quantitatively as possible
First, doesn't every single programmer based ATS do this currently? Second, as soon as this quantitative information becomes symmetrical (it always does, Google "google interview prep"), how do you prevent coders from gaming ("hacking") the system?
First, doesn't every single programmer based ATS do this currently? Second, as soon as this quantitative information becomes symmetrical (it always does, Google "google interview prep"), how do you prevent coders from gaming ("hacking") the system?
I know you are just getting started but it would great to hear if you plan to extend this to technical management and different skillsets that would entail.
We'd definitely like to expand to all skill sets. I think startups often underestimate how long it takes to get one thing completely right though, so it wouldn't surprise me if just getting really good at identifying great technical skills takes a long time!
Just doing a shotgun application to a bunch of startups seems like a hilariously bad idea. But maybe I'm biased because I'm currently recovering from burnout from working at a startup that I joined for the wrong reasons.
There is only one reason to join a startup as an employee: you really really really believe in the mission and you reallyx3+ believe that the team can execute. Anything else and you aren't doing the team or yourself any favours.
So, what are you really applying for?
So you can have a "worked at a YC startup" on your resume:
Just go work for google or facebook or amazon: you'll actually learn a tonne more about engineering/product dev at any of those places and they are a much better brandname for the rest of your career. Think you wont get into those companies? Spend a month preparing for the rigamarole that is a technical interview and you'll be fine.
So you can get investor contact:
Just apply to YC/techstars/500startups. Or email investors directly. Any of those options work better. You aren't getting any meaningful investor contact by being an employee.
So you can learn how a startup works to start your own:
Anyone who tells you this is deluded or conning you. There ain't nothing to it but to do it. The only way to learn how to do your startup is to do it. Nothing else comes close. Anything else is an excuse.
There is only one reason to join a startup as an employee: you really really really believe in the mission and you reallyx3+ believe that the team can execute. Anything else and you aren't doing the team or yourself any favours.
So, what are you really applying for?
So you can have a "worked at a YC startup" on your resume:
Just go work for google or facebook or amazon: you'll actually learn a tonne more about engineering/product dev at any of those places and they are a much better brandname for the rest of your career. Think you wont get into those companies? Spend a month preparing for the rigamarole that is a technical interview and you'll be fine.
So you can get investor contact:
Just apply to YC/techstars/500startups. Or email investors directly. Any of those options work better. You aren't getting any meaningful investor contact by being an employee.
So you can learn how a startup works to start your own:
Anyone who tells you this is deluded or conning you. There ain't nothing to it but to do it. The only way to learn how to do your startup is to do it. Nothing else comes close. Anything else is an excuse.
Working at a startup definitely isn't the right decision for everyone and I agree your reasons are the best ones to do so. We're specifically not taking a shotgun application approach here. We work with engineers to help them figure out five startups they're interested in for specific reasons to avoid a situation where they join a startup they wouldn't enjoy working at.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it but saying "working at a startup definitely isn't the right decision for everyone" sounds condescending.
Anyway, my response was geared towards how this seems to promote working at "a startup". If you are trying to work at "a startup" you have already (probably) failed because you are getting pulled in by the romantic idea of what a startup is. Don't work at "a startup". Find a company with a mission and team you like and work there.
FWIW, I do think your heart is in the right place: you aren't trying to capitalize of the romantic idea of a startup to hire a bunch of young and naive people :)
Anyway, my response was geared towards how this seems to promote working at "a startup". If you are trying to work at "a startup" you have already (probably) failed because you are getting pulled in by the romantic idea of what a startup is. Don't work at "a startup". Find a company with a mission and team you like and work there.
FWIW, I do think your heart is in the right place: you aren't trying to capitalize of the romantic idea of a startup to hire a bunch of young and naive people :)
Just telling people to choose 5 seems really flawed. You are both telling people that being interested in working at many different places is wrong, and telling them they need to choose 5 (because programmers are going to try to optimize).
The obvious good solution would be to algorithmically recommend startups based on a quick survey. The better solution is to have somebody whose job it is to know all about every YC startup, their teams, culture, and needs spend 5 minutes with you and give a few good recommendations.
The obvious good solution would be to algorithmically recommend startups based on a quick survey. The better solution is to have somebody whose job it is to know all about every YC startup, their teams, culture, and needs spend 5 minutes with you and give a few good recommendations.
> There is only one reason to join a startup as an employee: you really really really believe in the mission and you reallyx3 believe that the team can execute.
I'd say this is fairly reasonable.
> So, what are you really applying for?
For the opportunity to get in the funnel of startups using this system, so you can evaluate which ones have missions and teams you believe in and find one to work at. Presuming more than a few use this system, even if they don't use it exclusively, that's potentially a more efficient approach than research startups individually, finding ones you would want to work at, and then navigating their own individual hiring systems (and, to the extent you might miss some good startups that aren't using this system, there's no reason you can't also do that as well as the shotgun system.)
I'd say this is fairly reasonable.
> So, what are you really applying for?
For the opportunity to get in the funnel of startups using this system, so you can evaluate which ones have missions and teams you believe in and find one to work at. Presuming more than a few use this system, even if they don't use it exclusively, that's potentially a more efficient approach than research startups individually, finding ones you would want to work at, and then navigating their own individual hiring systems (and, to the extent you might miss some good startups that aren't using this system, there's no reason you can't also do that as well as the shotgun system.)
I'm going to assume your answer was "I want to have a semi-curated list of companies that are interested in me"
In and of itself, that's not a bad list to have. BUT deciding on which one you want to work at for the next 3 years should be more of a "I want to work there" not "let's see which ones will have me". So if you really want to work at a YC startup then go over to http://yclist.com/. Do some due diligence on who excites you ( not "which is the most exciting one that will have me") and apply to that one. Trust me. In the long run doing so will save you a lot more time.
Joining an early stage startup isn't a job, it's a lifestyle.
In and of itself, that's not a bad list to have. BUT deciding on which one you want to work at for the next 3 years should be more of a "I want to work there" not "let's see which ones will have me". So if you really want to work at a YC startup then go over to http://yclist.com/. Do some due diligence on who excites you ( not "which is the most exciting one that will have me") and apply to that one. Trust me. In the long run doing so will save you a lot more time.
Joining an early stage startup isn't a job, it's a lifestyle.
> Joining an early stage startup isn't a job, it's a lifestyle.
It absolutely is a job. The choice to pursue that kind of job is a lifestyle choice, sure, but no less so than the choice to prefer a job with a large corporation or similar institution (its a different lifestyle choice, of course, but its no more or less of one.)
It absolutely is a job. The choice to pursue that kind of job is a lifestyle choice, sure, but no less so than the choice to prefer a job with a large corporation or similar institution (its a different lifestyle choice, of course, but its no more or less of one.)
Sure, taken like that everything is alifestyle choice.
My point, which I guess made poorly, is a startup will consume your life so don't just work for "a startup" driven by "startups are cool". Rather, do your due diligence.
My point, which I guess made poorly, is a startup will consume your life so don't just work for "a startup" driven by "startups are cool". Rather, do your due diligence.
> There is only one reason to join a startup as an employee: you really really really believe in the mission and you reallyx3 believe that the team can execute.
...what if you really need the money (and never finished college, so no bigcorps are interested)?
...what if you really need the money (and never finished college, so no bigcorps are interested)?
What do you mean "bigcorps aren't interested" ?
Are you applying through the blackhole that is an online resume upload? Don't do that.
Find someone in your network who works at one of these places and get them to forward your resume.
Oh yeah, if you really need the money, maybe an early stage startup isn't the best idea :P
Are you applying through the blackhole that is an online resume upload? Don't do that.
Find someone in your network who works at one of these places and get them to forward your resume.
Oh yeah, if you really need the money, maybe an early stage startup isn't the best idea :P
> Find someone in your network who works at one of these places and get them to forward your resume.
People who haven't been to college aren't likely to have those kinds of connections. If they do, they're not going to be desperate for work.
> Oh yeah, if you really need the money, maybe an early stage startup isn't the best idea :P
If you really need the money you'll work for the next paycheck no matter who's paying it, even if it's just for the next month or two.
People who haven't been to college aren't likely to have those kinds of connections. If they do, they're not going to be desperate for work.
> Oh yeah, if you really need the money, maybe an early stage startup isn't the best idea :P
If you really need the money you'll work for the next paycheck no matter who's paying it, even if it's just for the next month or two.
"People who haven't been to college aren't likely to have those kinds of connections. If they do, they're not going to be desperate for work."
It's really not that hard to meet and develop a relationship with someone who works at FB/Apple/Google/Etc. Especially if you live in the Bay area and go to meetups/network a little.
It's really not that hard to meet and develop a relationship with someone who works at FB/Apple/Google/Etc. Especially if you live in the Bay area and go to meetups/network a little.
I would drop the "especially". Outside of a precious few areas, networking opportunities are hard to come by outside of the few companies that have offices in your area. Even then, more likely than not those companies have HR policies that require applicants to go through the black hole regardless of where they came from.
The whole world is not the Bay Area. Most of us do not have it so easy as to be able to walk into random meetups and leave with three potential contacts at decent tech companies.
The whole world is not the Bay Area. Most of us do not have it so easy as to be able to walk into random meetups and leave with three potential contacts at decent tech companies.
I have been living in the Bay area for the last 8 years but originally I grew up and went to university in Ireland. Hardly the center of the tech universe at the time.
I made a lot of contacts by organizing local meetups, travelling to different conferences in other parts of Europe and fostering relationships online.
I now work as a software engineer at Facebook, prior to that I worked at Apple. Effective networking takes a lot of work and can be achieved even if you are living in a remote area.
I made a lot of contacts by organizing local meetups, travelling to different conferences in other parts of Europe and fostering relationships online.
I now work as a software engineer at Facebook, prior to that I worked at Apple. Effective networking takes a lot of work and can be achieved even if you are living in a remote area.
I was exaggerating a bit. Local bigcorps aren't interested (I live in Canada, and can't move for a variety of reasons.)
I don't really have a network, though; I grew up on a farm and taught myself to program, and everything I've worked on so far has been either a remote contract (which usually ends up falling apart with refusal to pay for services rendered), or a startup (which usually ends up with my salary slashed to 1/8th industry standard under a "we're working for equity, right?" declaration.)
Right now, my wildest dream is a programming job that simply allows me to work eight hours a day and pays for a 1br apartment and food. At this rate, I'm almost considering leaving the industry entirely and working in retail or something.
I don't really have a network, though; I grew up on a farm and taught myself to program, and everything I've worked on so far has been either a remote contract (which usually ends up falling apart with refusal to pay for services rendered), or a startup (which usually ends up with my salary slashed to 1/8th industry standard under a "we're working for equity, right?" declaration.)
Right now, my wildest dream is a programming job that simply allows me to work eight hours a day and pays for a 1br apartment and food. At this rate, I'm almost considering leaving the industry entirely and working in retail or something.
I feel for you and understand that trying to recommend what you could/should do over the internet is hilariously arrogant/un-empathetic and everyones advice will converge to cookie-cutter ones like github profile/open source contributions blah blah.
Unfortunately, most of the obvious advice is true. Since you don't have the "normal" credentials of college/past employement/referrals, you will need to put some time in building an alternate set.
The good news is our field is an awesome one for credentialing yourself. If you don't feel like you have the stamina/drive for a open source projects etcs, how about competing on topcoder?
Good luck.
Unfortunately, most of the obvious advice is true. Since you don't have the "normal" credentials of college/past employement/referrals, you will need to put some time in building an alternate set.
The good news is our field is an awesome one for credentialing yourself. If you don't feel like you have the stamina/drive for a open source projects etcs, how about competing on topcoder?
Good luck.
> ...what if you really need the money (and never finished college, so no bigcorps are interested)?
Not every "bigcorp" is so short-sighted that they reject non-traditional candidates.
Not every "bigcorp" is so short-sighted that they reject non-traditional candidates.
What makes you think you need a degree to work for a large company?
Not the op but I'll comment on this. I have no degree. I have applied to all of the big names and never got any further than a rejection email (even that is rare).
I get interviews from startups and medium size companies so my resume can't be that awful, and I know they aren't looking at my portfolio or repos (because that can be easily verified).
[deleted]
[deleted]
Triplebyte founder here, we're managing the application process for this. We wrote some more here about how we're running our process: http://blog.triplebyte.com/announcing-triplebyte
If you have any feedback or thoughts, we'd love to hear them.
If you have any feedback or thoughts, we'd love to hear them.
I quite liked the application process, it was very smooth. I'm interested to see how the rest of the process goes – since the two interviews are just chatting about projects I've worked on and having someone watch me code, it doesn't seem to stressful. (Let's be honest – it's sometimes hard to get me to shut up about projects I've worked on or want to work on...)
I'm particularly interested in this as a startup filter. There are a lot of startups out there, many that I don't know about. I'm wondering if Triplebyte could help me find something I'm interested in by filtering out startups that I'm unlikely to be interested in. If they can do that, I'll be a huge fan, and if they can't (because I'm too picky), then it's not too time-consuming or stressful a process to have tried it.
I'm particularly interested in this as a startup filter. There are a lot of startups out there, many that I don't know about. I'm wondering if Triplebyte could help me find something I'm interested in by filtering out startups that I'm unlikely to be interested in. If they can do that, I'll be a huge fan, and if they can't (because I'm too picky), then it's not too time-consuming or stressful a process to have tried it.
> I'm particularly interested in this as a startup filter. There are a lot of startups out there, many that I don't know about. I'm wondering if Triplebyte could help me find something I'm interested in by filtering out startups that I'm unlikely to be interested in.
That's exactly what we're going to do. There's an increasing number of tools to help investors find startups to invest in and the same should exist for applicants, since that's essentially what they're doing with their time.
That's exactly what we're going to do. There's an increasing number of tools to help investors find startups to invest in and the same should exist for applicants, since that's essentially what they're doing with their time.
I'm curious what info you derive from "watching someone code". I've hired a lot of people over the years and found what works best for me is to just talk to them, no coding.
But if you're in a screen share and wathicng someone code and watching them make mistakes, type poorly, or sit there thinking with the cursor just blinking isn't this sort of an interpretive performance art that you're trying to then judge objectively?
How do you avoid being biased to hiring only people who type fast? (There seems to be this obsession with lines of code per minute to the detriment of effective functionality per week in our industry.)
But if you're in a screen share and wathicng someone code and watching them make mistakes, type poorly, or sit there thinking with the cursor just blinking isn't this sort of an interpretive performance art that you're trying to then judge objectively?
How do you avoid being biased to hiring only people who type fast? (There seems to be this obsession with lines of code per minute to the detriment of effective functionality per week in our industry.)
How do current YC companies fill-in non-technical positions? Are there plans in near-future to cover these positions too?
That's something we could definitely expand to in the future. For now we're focusing on programmers both because that's the biggest need and it's likely a big challenge just becoming experts at that.
[deleted]
This is a huge need as well
I really like the idea, I just completed the programming questions. I understand that you can't have the test in every conceivable language but I feel like a few of the questions were too pythonic for really no reason at all.
Do most YC startups use python ?
Do most YC startups use python ?
Which ones? We're thinking about offering all the questions in a bunch of languages, and letting people pick.
[deleted]
I liked the process. However there's no real feedback, does the fact that we reached the phone call mean that we succeeded at the "test" or not?
How do you guys compare to HackerRank?
Our online programming questions are more FizzBuzz than the challenges and puzzles HackerRank use to test skill. We're doing most of our work in the interview process and looking at ways to make that more effective and less adversarial. We think the hiring process is broken enough that there is likely enough room for multiple different approaches.
or gradberry?
My favorite part of this is that it reduces the n*m engineers-to-employers search problem to an n+m problem (to an extent).
Right now, engineers search through many companies to find a job, and companies search through many engineers to fill a position. The traditional way this is done is an interview gauntlet, whose primary purpose is to verify technical ability. Since that's something that should only be done once per engineer, TripleByte seems to be providing that intermediary service. Then a much shorter set of interviews can be used to check fit, thus saving each candidate and company an incredible amount of time.
hired.com is another company trying to do something like this, albeit using a slightly different methodology.
edit: I accidentally a word.
Right now, engineers search through many companies to find a job, and companies search through many engineers to fill a position. The traditional way this is done is an interview gauntlet, whose primary purpose is to verify technical ability. Since that's something that should only be done once per engineer, TripleByte seems to be providing that intermediary service. Then a much shorter set of interviews can be used to check fit, thus saving each candidate and company an incredible amount of time.
hired.com is another company trying to do something like this, albeit using a slightly different methodology.
edit: I accidentally a word.
As a engineer who is not a startup founder, my initial reaction is that of "Don't use these guys if you are a jobseeker!" Detailed data on how you did in a specific set of tests (which may have nothing to do with what you do on the job) will be benchmarked not only during your initial application, but also throughout your job at the company, and at future companies that use TripleByte.
> "But this is a horizontal technical HR layer that spreads across many companies, instead of being contained inside one enormous corporation."
Perhaps being pessimistic, but I have no wish for a the future where I go from a company that is using TripleByte to another one that is also doing the same, and being told "We know your TripleByte score on your last job was 315, we won't give you $X unless you raise that to 400 in your first year". I also don't understand how this won't create a collusion of sorts amongst companies who all use TripleByte (since TripleByte knows exactly how much they pay you).
[Please feel free to correct me if I have missed out on some fundamental different in the way the company works. I have enormous respect for the founder (Harj) personally, but this seems like a bad idea for the majority of the workforce. ]
> "But this is a horizontal technical HR layer that spreads across many companies, instead of being contained inside one enormous corporation."
Perhaps being pessimistic, but I have no wish for a the future where I go from a company that is using TripleByte to another one that is also doing the same, and being told "We know your TripleByte score on your last job was 315, we won't give you $X unless you raise that to 400 in your first year". I also don't understand how this won't create a collusion of sorts amongst companies who all use TripleByte (since TripleByte knows exactly how much they pay you).
[Please feel free to correct me if I have missed out on some fundamental different in the way the company works. I have enormous respect for the founder (Harj) personally, but this seems like a bad idea for the majority of the workforce. ]
Thanks for the thoughts! We have no desire to create something akin to a credit score that could be used against people. What we're trying to do is build a process that makes it easy for applicants to show their strengths, that's the kind of information we want to share with employers vs a numerical score. Our focus is entirely on helping discover talented people who might be overlooked by current processes.
> We don't care where you went to school or which companies you've worked at. We only care if you can code.
Filtering candidates by pedigree is one of the biggest mistakes companies make, particularly in Silicon Valley, but filtering by coding ability (as measured primarily by online tests) is just as naive.
There are tons of people who can code themselves out of a maze but struggle to ship code that solves real problems and creates real value.
A lot of startups would do better with mediocre engineers who can see the big picture than superb engineers who can't see beyond their monitor.
From https://triplebyte.com/manifesto:
> Companies should not have to make recruiting a core competency.
This is incredibly flawed, especially for startups. Recruiting is a two-way street. If an early-stage startup can't effectively sell itself to candidates, chances are it won't be able to sell itself to customers, partners, etc.
Filtering candidates by pedigree is one of the biggest mistakes companies make, particularly in Silicon Valley, but filtering by coding ability (as measured primarily by online tests) is just as naive.
There are tons of people who can code themselves out of a maze but struggle to ship code that solves real problems and creates real value.
A lot of startups would do better with mediocre engineers who can see the big picture than superb engineers who can't see beyond their monitor.
From https://triplebyte.com/manifesto:
> Companies should not have to make recruiting a core competency.
This is incredibly flawed, especially for startups. Recruiting is a two-way street. If an early-stage startup can't effectively sell itself to candidates, chances are it won't be able to sell itself to customers, partners, etc.
> As for their revenue model, TripleByte takes a 25 percent cut of an engineer’s first-year salary, which is a fairly typical model for recruiting agencies.
Hey Harj,
Do you think that by charging a flat % of the first year salary that TripleByte might be adding downward pressure on the potential salary for an engineer?
Hey Harj,
Do you think that by charging a flat % of the first year salary that TripleByte might be adding downward pressure on the potential salary for an engineer?
I think the upwards pressure from companies not being able to hire enough good engineers is likely a much stronger force. That being said, we're not tied to the % model. We plan to experiment with both our selection process and pricing to figure out what works best.
One cool innovation I've seen is converting from a % upfront model to a % recurring model (Ex. instead of 25% upfront convert to 2% over 12 months).
It benefits start-ups because they don't have a large cash outlay at once and aligns the incentives of the firm to find great candidates that will stick. It also creates a more predictable revenue stream in the form of monthly recurring revenue.
It benefits start-ups because they don't have a large cash outlay at once and aligns the incentives of the firm to find great candidates that will stick. It also creates a more predictable revenue stream in the form of monthly recurring revenue.
We think that's a great idea and something we're looking at too, especially for startups with less funding.
If you don't have the network and you need a recruiter (as I have in the past and will again), the 25% is how much you give up for the help getting a job.
If a jobseeker won't see that kind of value from a recruiter, they can always take it on themselves.
If a jobseeker won't see that kind of value from a recruiter, they can always take it on themselves.
[deleted]
To save most of you the hassle. It's Visa and US work permit only.
Founder here. Yeah, sorry about that. We totally intend to work with people without visas (it's actually where the idea started). We're just doing a phased launch. Talking to lots of people on the phone is hard to scale. We'll be removing the restriction as soon as we can.
EDIT People without visas are free to register now. They just can't book phone calls. We'll let everyone who registers know when they can book a call.
EDIT People without visas are free to register now. They just can't book phone calls. We'll let everyone who registers know when they can book a call.
Uhm, something weird happened. I tried booking without a visa to see the error, but it let my booking through (I then cancelled my reservation).
Thank you for pointing out the most important answer.
And I assume no remote work allowed as most YC companies stance on distributed teams is hilariously archaic.
I gotta say, this is a great move for founders + companies: Commoditizing your components will lead to downward price pressure on engineering wages. Also, it's superficially great for employees too: apply to a common app and get prequalified for N companies rather than 1. But I doubt any of those companies will ACTUALLY change their hiring funnels, which means that this is just an extra, gratuitous step in the process. Perhaps there will be the benefit of being introduced to many hiring funnels at once, but that could have been achieved by an "are you hiring" email, or by checking out those companies' hiring websites.
Harj is not really interested in creating a service that "measures" a person's ability or "predicting" their future performance, because that's impossible to do.
What they're really doing is creating a cargo cult tool that gives the illusion of being "objective" and using "data", so that they can sell the serivce based on this appearance, and later get bought out by LinkedIn or something.
Perhaps they're doing a startup themselves because they had problems finding jobs due to hiring practices such as these.
What they're really doing is creating a cargo cult tool that gives the illusion of being "objective" and using "data", so that they can sell the serivce based on this appearance, and later get bought out by LinkedIn or something.
Perhaps they're doing a startup themselves because they had problems finding jobs due to hiring practices such as these.
It's great to see earlier YC Partners going back into the program again, it really speaks to how strong YC is. Best of luck Harj!
If TripleByte’s software was even trained on a sufficient volume of data, Taggar imagines it could even make the hiring decision if technical ability is the sole criteria.
When is technical ability ever the sole criteria? Granted it would be incredibly useful to know up front if a candidate is technically strong enough but you still need to establish if a candidate would work well with your team. Technical ability is worthless if the candidate has a horrible attitude.
That being said, the idea of accumulating significant data over a significant period of time and actually defining what makes a successful engineer is intriguing.
When is technical ability ever the sole criteria? Granted it would be incredibly useful to know up front if a candidate is technically strong enough but you still need to establish if a candidate would work well with your team. Technical ability is worthless if the candidate has a horrible attitude.
That being said, the idea of accumulating significant data over a significant period of time and actually defining what makes a successful engineer is intriguing.
Hey, founder here. Yes, we totally agree that things other than technical ability matter. Some of these things (productivity, ability to work on a team, communication ability) we think we can evaluate. Others (company culture) we can't. As you say, however, getting better at identifying good engineers (outside of any company's specific requirements) is valuable.
I'd love if there could be more information about what YC companies are participating in hiring through this process. Or have I missed that info somewhere?
Here, I spotted your problem for you: "move to the Bay Area"
Hey, founder here. No worries then, there are plenty of YC startups outside the Bay Area :)
I meant the fact that one should move at all. You guys are locking yourself out of a huge market of potentially great developers because you don't consider remote work.
Heh, the HR at my old company sent me too many bullshit candidates. We had already tried a solution where you'd solve multiple problems and then get assigned a score, but it sucked, every single one of them was an algorithm question.
I hacked out a quick page (that'd inform you it'll log everything, but gave you the problem to solve only after you accepted), that litterally asked you to solve fizzbuzz in any language you like. But it logged timestamped keystrokes to the server and if the tab lost focus.
Of course I wrote a small player that would replay the logs so you could watch the candidate come up with the solution and watch them writing it :)
I just had too many candidates googling questions in a phone interview, so we changed our process.
They'd take the online fizzbuzz test, and then we'll invite them for an onsite interview if they pass, in my opinion it worked surprisingly well.
Too bad I can't try out how these guys are doing it.
I hacked out a quick page (that'd inform you it'll log everything, but gave you the problem to solve only after you accepted), that litterally asked you to solve fizzbuzz in any language you like. But it logged timestamped keystrokes to the server and if the tab lost focus.
Of course I wrote a small player that would replay the logs so you could watch the candidate come up with the solution and watch them writing it :)
I just had too many candidates googling questions in a phone interview, so we changed our process.
They'd take the online fizzbuzz test, and then we'll invite them for an onsite interview if they pass, in my opinion it worked surprisingly well.
Too bad I can't try out how these guys are doing it.
With that approach, anyone who immediately switches to a programmer's editor to write the code and pastes it in when done (either manually or via something like It's All Text) will look identical to a candidate who searched for the answer and pasted it in. The former is a property you'd want to select for, while the latter is one you'd want to select against.
Yes. That's why i had a big fat warning telling them to not to this before they started the process :)
The page before they started basically told them everything we'd do. My line of thought was that anyone being able to bypass it is worth interviewing anyways.
I explicitiy told them that we'd log EVERYTHING and asked them to directly write the browser in the JS IDE (well, syntax highlight but no autocomplete) that'll come up, and that they shouldn't switch tabs or windows.
I still think this is fair, for litterally fizzbuzz, nothing similar or anything, just fizzbuzz.
I didn't care about (small) syntax/logic errors or anything (because you'd never run the code), but you wouldn't believe the amount of people unaware of the modulo operator.
The page before they started basically told them everything we'd do. My line of thought was that anyone being able to bypass it is worth interviewing anyways.
I explicitiy told them that we'd log EVERYTHING and asked them to directly write the browser in the JS IDE (well, syntax highlight but no autocomplete) that'll come up, and that they shouldn't switch tabs or windows.
I still think this is fair, for litterally fizzbuzz, nothing similar or anything, just fizzbuzz.
I didn't care about (small) syntax/logic errors or anything (because you'd never run the code), but you wouldn't believe the amount of people unaware of the modulo operator.
Ah. If you're upfront about it, that's somewhat more reasonable. Though I'd still rather see more approaches that are tools-agnostic, and better approximations of real work.
Fair enough, I slightly amended my post, but I think asking for fizzbuzz with generic syntax highlighting is fair enough. As I think it's simple enough to write tool agnostic, because I'd expect you to be able to write it in any language you like, ignoring fatal syntax errors.
It's really just fizzbuzz, not an approximation of real life world, we had on site interviews for that (Switzerland is quite small, not sure how that'd apply to the US).
It's really just fizzbuzz, not an approximation of real life world, we had on site interviews for that (Switzerland is quite small, not sure how that'd apply to the US).
A real programmer has more than one machine at their disposal. :)
TripleByte, like many other people and companies, refers to "software engineers" as if they are a monolithic group. Is this another case where there is an implicit "web and mobile" attached to "engineer", or is the process really flexible enough for engineers of all skillsets?
Congrats on the launch. This feels a little bit "code monkey" to me. We don't care who you are, or what you're like, as long as you can write code. Do you plan to account for the "soft skills"? I'd expect YC companies to hire for more than raw engineering abilities.
We definitely recognize there's more to a person than just engineering ability :) For now that's what we're focusing on because it's more quantifiable and we think companies are better placed to assess soft skills, since those are usually more specific to them.
In 2007, researchers published a seminal paper which shows that the more meritocratic you think your company is, the more biased you are:(http://www.socialjudgments.com/docs/Uhlmann%20and%20Cohen%20...).
While that is also human to do, and company cultures obviously develop flavors over time, when it comes to technical hiring, we sorely need an effort to first prove and then to reduce biases, based on data. This is a great effort.
At http://InterviewKickstart.com, we're trying to do this indirectly in a small way. The better you are at solving problems, the less the biases affect you.
While that is also human to do, and company cultures obviously develop flavors over time, when it comes to technical hiring, we sorely need an effort to first prove and then to reduce biases, based on data. This is a great effort.
At http://InterviewKickstart.com, we're trying to do this indirectly in a small way. The better you are at solving problems, the less the biases affect you.
While it seems time-saving, I don't think putting all your eggs in one basket is a good idea when it comes to interviewing. If you bomb the interview (it can happen to great engineers), then you've effectively shut yourself out of every YC company? I'd much rather interview 5 times and be 99% sure I'll get one, than go all or nothing and potentially get screwed.
Really dig that the first pass doesn't eliminate those who studied at schools other than Stanford.
> Triple byte.
> Not word aligned.
> My hardcore c programmer in me is freaking out.
I liked the site, but I disliked being forced to answer questions about languages you don't know the internals of. Even very basic questions about (what is x) and (what will the program return) are more complicated than they seem under the hood.
[deleted]
Can one get access to ones results? (Even though I have no visa anyways)
How are you planning on not having companies using the referred candidates from your platform and hiring them outside of TripleByte?
Is the fizzbuzz diff for diff positions(frontend,backend,mobile,security) or?
No, it's not. We think that understanding basic code should apply to everyone. That said, we're not trusting the fizzbuzz for now. We're going to talk to the first several hundred people who apply, then look for correlations
Such a bummer it is only for people having a US Visa already.
i'm in the market for a remote position. is that something that would work here? or is this only for locals or those able to move to the bay area?
Nauseating.
You're an engineer. You can create millions of dollars of worth for a company.
Do yourself a favor; learn to market yourself. Learn to create opportunities for yourself.
Want to work at a YC company? Write them directly.
Want to actually make money today, instead of hoping for some grand exit five years down the line? Demonstrate your value (in money), show that you can code, pitch your services to prospective companies and charge a premium.
Please stop joining recruiting companies where you're shoved down a "pipeline" or somewhere where you're considered a "resource" or some outfit that has the name "staffing" in their company name.
You're better than that.
You're an engineer. You can create millions of dollars of worth for a company.
Do yourself a favor; learn to market yourself. Learn to create opportunities for yourself.
Want to work at a YC company? Write them directly.
Want to actually make money today, instead of hoping for some grand exit five years down the line? Demonstrate your value (in money), show that you can code, pitch your services to prospective companies and charge a premium.
Please stop joining recruiting companies where you're shoved down a "pipeline" or somewhere where you're considered a "resource" or some outfit that has the name "staffing" in their company name.
You're better than that.
Well first, that's an extremely elitist point of view. Your argument seems to be 'If you're not a rock-em sock-em networking people-person, you don't deserve a job'.
Secondly, this is about helping YC companies hire. Doing the hard, complex work of filtering out for quality candidates, rather than spending weeks of your time interviewing instead of actually improving their product.
Thirdly, not all engineers are battle-hardened 10x SV rockstar ninjas. Some people have programming experience but haven't gotten into the SV echo chamber yet, some people are new to the industry, some people are from other countries, etc. Sure, you ideally want to build yourself up and make a name for yourself, contribute to projects, create some value, but when you're starting out that's basically a load of bullshit as far as useful advice goes, unless you're suggesting people just don't take a job until they've spent a few years self-promoting.
Secondly, this is about helping YC companies hire. Doing the hard, complex work of filtering out for quality candidates, rather than spending weeks of your time interviewing instead of actually improving their product.
Thirdly, not all engineers are battle-hardened 10x SV rockstar ninjas. Some people have programming experience but haven't gotten into the SV echo chamber yet, some people are new to the industry, some people are from other countries, etc. Sure, you ideally want to build yourself up and make a name for yourself, contribute to projects, create some value, but when you're starting out that's basically a load of bullshit as far as useful advice goes, unless you're suggesting people just don't take a job until they've spent a few years self-promoting.
>'If you're not a rock-em sock-em networking people-person, you don't deserve a job'
Writing a direct email to a YC Founder vs relying on someone else is far from a "rock-em sock-em neworking people-person". That's basic self-advocacy.
This company takes 25% of your first years salary. Regardless of whether the engineer or the company pays for it, it's less money on the table for you.
YC Combinator companies are well known. If you want to work for one, write them directly. Ask for what you want. Advocate for yourself.
You've probably worked very hard to get where you're at, whether it's your schooling or a long, hard fought career. Don't let someone else represent your accomplishments or your compensation needs.
Writing a direct email to a YC Founder vs relying on someone else is far from a "rock-em sock-em neworking people-person". That's basic self-advocacy.
This company takes 25% of your first years salary. Regardless of whether the engineer or the company pays for it, it's less money on the table for you.
YC Combinator companies are well known. If you want to work for one, write them directly. Ask for what you want. Advocate for yourself.
You've probably worked very hard to get where you're at, whether it's your schooling or a long, hard fought career. Don't let someone else represent your accomplishments or your compensation needs.
Staffing agencies have unlocked high-paying jobs for which I have the technical skills, but where I lack the "people talents" and connections to even get my foot in the door.
Similarly, I am not an excellent chef. I can feed myself, but when I am entertaining others we eat out.
This isn't about being lazy; this is about an inability or very poor ability to do something, and outsourcing that ability to another human. If you don't want to be at the party, that's fine, but don't rain on our party night.
Similarly, I am not an excellent chef. I can feed myself, but when I am entertaining others we eat out.
This isn't about being lazy; this is about an inability or very poor ability to do something, and outsourcing that ability to another human. If you don't want to be at the party, that's fine, but don't rain on our party night.
Also, if companies are hiring based on your ability to market yourself, rather than code, then you end up with a team optimized towards making themselves look good, and not necessarily to accomplish.
As an employer, it would be great if candidates always knew about all the opportunities and companies out there. Employers would love it if recruiting firms were no longer necessary. However, it's not feasible to expect every potential hire to research every potential option, and recruiting companies drastically reduce the effort and time needed to find a good fit.
I understand all the criticisms, but it seems pretty clear to me why recruiting firms continue to stick around and add real value, despite charging a frustratingly high premium.
I understand all the criticisms, but it seems pretty clear to me why recruiting firms continue to stick around and add real value, despite charging a frustratingly high premium.
"no resumes, just show us you can code."
My resume has 27 years of showing other employers that I can code. I worked hard to build that resume.
The problem I have these days, being 51 years old and quite public about the fact that I am mentally ill, is that no one believes that I can code.
My resume has 27 years of showing other employers that I can code. I worked hard to build that resume.
The problem I have these days, being 51 years old and quite public about the fact that I am mentally ill, is that no one believes that I can code.
I see the problem. Experience is certainly valuable. But a resume also shows age and status. We're working to eliminate age discrimination (and other biases). That's part of why we do blind phone interviews.
> But a resume also shows age and status.
...and accomplishments, leadership, responsibility (assuming no grossly fabricated lies).
> That's part of why we do blind phone interviews.
Phone calls still reveal a lot. Gender, age, native language, .... Only 100% text based communication is (reasonably) age+genderless.
...and accomplishments, leadership, responsibility (assuming no grossly fabricated lies).
> That's part of why we do blind phone interviews.
Phone calls still reveal a lot. Gender, age, native language, .... Only 100% text based communication is (reasonably) age+genderless.
A friend interviewed for a job as an apartment manager. The owner of the complex specifically asked her to deny African-American applicants based on the sounds of their voices over the telephone.
Flatly illegal - yes, but widespread here in These United States.
Flatly illegal - yes, but widespread here in These United States.
Actually, a resume just shows you can craft a resume. It's not a good way to show leadership skills, or demonstrate experience, etc.
We've been much more respectful of people (which is good for us) since we stopped looking at resumes.
We've been much more respectful of people (which is good for us) since we stopped looking at resumes.
> Actually, a resume just shows you can craft a resume.
It also conveys communication skills. What good is a programmer who can write code but can't write a document describing their own work history?
The world isn't programmers. What if you want a non-programmer role? Leads, organizers, directors? Do CEO candidates sit down and write a binary search tree? (of course not, being installed as a CEO means you are one of a privileged class who are given roles, not one who "tries out" for things.)
It also conveys communication skills. What good is a programmer who can write code but can't write a document describing their own work history?
The world isn't programmers. What if you want a non-programmer role? Leads, organizers, directors? Do CEO candidates sit down and write a binary search tree? (of course not, being installed as a CEO means you are one of a privileged class who are given roles, not one who "tries out" for things.)
If you wanted a programmer who could communicate well, why on earth would you want them to communicate work history? A well written resume can show good communication skills, but not necessarily the special flavor you need.
CEOs and other execs aren't screened with resumes. For better or worse, it's all about their networking skills, perception of previous history, etc.
CEOs and other execs aren't screened with resumes. For better or worse, it's all about their networking skills, perception of previous history, etc.
Lying on a resume has cost many people not only their job, but also their careers. There's still the trust that you're only lying about small things as humans instinctively do, and that you're not misrepresenting major accomplishments or employment dates.
The goal is not to prevent lying, it's the find people who are good a particular job. This is not the same set of people who are good at writing an entirely truthful, impressive resume. There's some overlap but not as much as I would have guessed.
Lying precludes any filtering. You can't make an accurate decision with inaccurate information. (Or can you?)
Currently, employers expect small amounts of lying about low-impact things - when a resume says "I made this", we all know it really means "I was on a team that designed this, and the company later outsourced its construction". We accept this because it's a social norm.
But say "I worked here" and everyone believes you.
Currently, employers expect small amounts of lying about low-impact things - when a resume says "I made this", we all know it really means "I was on a team that designed this, and the company later outsourced its construction". We accept this because it's a social norm.
But say "I worked here" and everyone believes you.
It is not hard at all to verify every last detail on my resume. You don't need my transcripts to verify that I graduated from UC Santa Cruz - just call or email the registrar. You can also find that I really did attend Caltech, because PDFs of my yearbooks are online, with my photographs in them.
There's a lot of this kind of thing you can do before even a phone interview, without consulting my employment references.
Everything in my resume is The Gospel Truth, but I am completely convinced that no one believes it. I really am.
There's a lot of this kind of thing you can do before even a phone interview, without consulting my employment references.
Everything in my resume is The Gospel Truth, but I am completely convinced that no one believes it. I really am.
The problem isn't your resume, it's people who don't create good resumes but who are otherwise very skilled. I believe yours! I just don't believe resumes on aggregate are a good screening mechanism for most jobs. They also communicate lots of incidental information that can be false-bias flags.
> They also communicate lots of incidental information that can be false-bias flags.
That's the entire point in most cases. Don't want to hire a nerd when you need a bro.
Also: relevance! If you're hiring for a Linux-heavy job but the applicant has 20 years of Windows NT experience and they want a Senior Staff Linux Development role, you can either throw their resume away or talk them down to (an insulting) junior position.
In another context, say you're Google. You have 80,000 in-bound interested people wanting to interview with you per year. How, without up front resumes or other relevant information, do you deal? You can't talk to all of them.
That's the entire point in most cases. Don't want to hire a nerd when you need a bro.
Also: relevance! If you're hiring for a Linux-heavy job but the applicant has 20 years of Windows NT experience and they want a Senior Staff Linux Development role, you can either throw their resume away or talk them down to (an insulting) junior position.
In another context, say you're Google. You have 80,000 in-bound interested people wanting to interview with you per year. How, without up front resumes or other relevant information, do you deal? You can't talk to all of them.
I'm relatively sure Google doesn't look at resumes for initial screening. They do work samples: http://www.wired.com/2015/04/hire-like-google/
Of course they do. It's called the HR resume screen.
I submitted many resumes to google but met with no response. However I've interviewed six times now; each time, they found me by searching, uh, Google.
That is, their HR people found my website on the web. They didn't find my cover letter and resume in their own applicant tracking system.
That's not the case everywhere; I was hired at Apple in the mid-nineties by applying directly to the company, then sometime later my manager-to-be dug up my resume in their system.
But as far as I am able to tell, resumes submitted to google wind up in the bit bucket.
Google's initial phone screen always consist of just a few very basic computer science questions.
Quite commonly phone screens with other companies consist of "How many years of java experience do you have? How many years of linux experience do you have? How many years of apache experience do you have?"
Oddly, there is never any concern for what one accomplished - nor failed to accomplish - during those years of experience.
That is, their HR people found my website on the web. They didn't find my cover letter and resume in their own applicant tracking system.
That's not the case everywhere; I was hired at Apple in the mid-nineties by applying directly to the company, then sometime later my manager-to-be dug up my resume in their system.
But as far as I am able to tell, resumes submitted to google wind up in the bit bucket.
Google's initial phone screen always consist of just a few very basic computer science questions.
Quite commonly phone screens with other companies consist of "How many years of java experience do you have? How many years of linux experience do you have? How many years of apache experience do you have?"
Oddly, there is never any concern for what one accomplished - nor failed to accomplish - during those years of experience.
I once got a call back from Google after submitting a resume... 2 years later... from the Tokyo office.
I echo your sentiments that I have no idea what goes on in and around their resume system.
I echo your sentiments that I have no idea what goes on in and around their resume system.
Have you ever been involved on the other side of hiring programmers? If so, did you hire them exclusively from their resumes or did you have them demonstrate their ability directly to you in some way?
The other problem, being >25 years old, is that no one believes that you'll work 16 hour days every day for months while living on ramen (or soylent?) until you're at the position where you can take a few million in funding (and then repeat until exit).
So what I get, is that I work sixteen hour days every day for years while dining at soup kitchens because I have no pay at all, while I'm building my own business.
When I get my business actually making money, I'm going to hire a bunch of homeless people. I really am.
When I get my business actually making money, I'm going to hire a bunch of homeless people. I really am.
Founder of http://OfferLetter.io here - Harj, love what you're doing with a common YC app, and the spirit of the hiring manifesto.
I'm curious about your approach to making sure the candidate experience is really top-notch since it's still your platform, and how deep you plan on going - even good startups may put forth exploding offers, lowball candidates, forget candidates due to high-pressure sales tactics, etc. This doesn't leave a great taste in engineers' mouths.
Pure top-of-funnel filtering is important, but seems oversaturated. The candidate experience and matchmaking process seem like the real differentiators. What do you feel is the best way to address these?
I'm curious about your approach to making sure the candidate experience is really top-notch since it's still your platform, and how deep you plan on going - even good startups may put forth exploding offers, lowball candidates, forget candidates due to high-pressure sales tactics, etc. This doesn't leave a great taste in engineers' mouths.
Pure top-of-funnel filtering is important, but seems oversaturated. The candidate experience and matchmaking process seem like the real differentiators. What do you feel is the best way to address these?
Our plan is to continually experiment with new ways to measure technical ability, that aren't as adversarial as most standard practices today. We'd love to hear any ideas for more experiments we could run.