On: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

[rifung]

The problem is that it's extremely difficult to identify whether someone will excel at a job just through an interview. Even if someone really impresses everyone during the interview phase, it's totally possible that once they get hired they'll hate whatever you have them do and just do a mediocre job at it.

[waterlesscloud → rifung]

I'd go so far as to say the CEO mentioned in the story with their 70 "great" programmers who would hire another 30 "great" programmers...

A. Doesn't really have 70 "great" programmers, certainly not 100% of their team. I just don't believe that.

B. Actually needs 100 "great" programmers, and none that are just "good", in order to succeed fabulously.

C. That the CEO in question could accurately and consistently identify greatness in advance of hiring.

Sorry, it's just not a believable situation.

[kmonsen → waterlesscloud]

Also, her can hire 30 great programmers in a few months if he pays them rely well. But of course he is not looking to do that.

[Chronic30 → rifung]

Well then the interview process seems to be the problem then.

[khyryk → Chronic30]

Something some have been saying for decades.

[kar2014 → khyryk]

Some are true. If you interview a lot you know most of the interviews are useless to figure out good candidates from mediocre ones.