If it's any help, I'm currently looking for someone to worth with as a SQL
Programmer, at my company. This should give some people an idea of one
process for hiring, and the goals that need to be achieved to get the job.
Incidentally, it's the post hasn't been filled yet.
The process goes like this, candidate sends in CV and covering letter (or
agency stuff) along with application form. From this there is an initial
interview and a technical test administered by our recruiting people. They
report back to my department with the test (unmarked) and their general
impression of the candidate's suitability - i.e. they don't appear to be
lieing, their took the time to actually iron a shirt, and other really basic
stuff. If the report is OK, (doesn't have to be outstanding, just good), we
then mark the test to see what the technical ability is like. The test
itself is hard, you'd need a good working knowledge of SQL Server, and the
T-SQL language to be able to get good marks. You will also need to be able
to demostraight that you have good associated skills for DB work (i.e.
understanding normalisation techniques, being able to translate from end
user fuzzy requirements to into a scaleable relational table structure). If
the marks pass a certain level (I'm being deliberately vauge on this level),
we then get the candidate in for a second interview. This second interview
starts off with a presentation from the candidate. The will be on a topic
related to the job that they are going for. In the case of the SQL
Programmer job, the candidate is given a nasty database scenario (again, I'm
being deliberatly vague) and they need to give a presentation of how they
would solve the problem. Ideally, this will mean that they do solve the
problem, come up with a working end result, and the presentation is then
based around that - i.e. the solution, how and why they arrived at the
solution. At this point, I need to point out that it doesn't matter if they
did solve the problem. We're interested in how they coped with the problem,
if they can choose approprated technologies that will help, identify
potential problems and possibly solve them. Basically, can they do the job?
Finally, after the presentation, and questions this then carries on as a
normal interview where we find out more about the candidate, their past
experience, future goals, blah blah blah.
I know, I rambled on a bit there. That's out department interview process.
It's tough, but we get the best people that way. Oh, and if the candidate
says that they are not experienced, at T-SQL, but are learning, fine - I can
be more fogiving with the technical test, as long as they has the aptitude
to do the job, knowing the syntax off pat doesn't matter. We'll just be
looking for the ability to learn, and how they go about solving problems.
Actually, for our normal SQL problem, it's unlikely that candidate will
solve the problem properly. It's extremely nasty.
Regards
Colin Dawson
www.cjdawson.com
rowe_newsgroups said:
So outside of having x number of years of experience how do candidates
"prove" themselves to employers?
Thanks,
Seth Rowe