Reverse Technical Interviews
One of the things I've had to do quite often in the last few years is conduct technical interviews.
It's always a challenge as of course, if you want to make sure that a resource is technically competent in specific tasks or role for which you are resourcing, that's pretty easy; just ask questions oriented around those tasks that they will be responsible for. But what if you want to assess an individual's broader technical competency of and experience with a platform?
As a technically oriented guy myself, it's very easy to inject my bias and my core knowledge into the equation and I think that typically makes for a bad interview. There are always many things that I know well and many things that I don't know well for any given platform. So how can I go about measuring a candidate's competency without injecting my own knowledge and experience bias?
As an addendum, for technical interviews, it's sometimes difficult to come up with a good set of questions that are "fair". I don't think it's fair to ask obscure questions for which few folks would know off the top of their head, but would have no problem solving with Google and StackExchange, for example. I also don't like to ask brain-bender type questions as I don't find the outcome of those questions to be generally useful in evaluating technical expertise.
One approach is to ask open-ended design type questions. "Given this platform, how would you design a solution to meet requirement X?" "What are the benefits of approach U versus approach V for modeling this data?" These are okay, but I find that I often get clouded by situational bias. What I mean by that is that I tend to think of problems I've solved in the recent past or problems that I'm working on now. But I know that many of these design issues took me days if not weeks of research, prototyping, experimenting, and discussion to settle upon -- it simply doesn't seem fair to ask a candidate to produce a response on the spot. It's worth something, I guess, if they are able to come up with the same solution (or a better one!), but if they can't, does one hold that against them?
So in thinking about these issues, I think one good approach is to go with a reverse technical interview. What this means is that I ask the candidate to produce a list of technical and design questions for me for the interview. My thought is that this allows me to turn the bias that I would otherwise have into a tool because they will have the same biases. They will tend to ask questions around what they've worked on, what hard problems they've solved, and what experience they have. This seems like a much more dynamic approach and would seem to provide more valuable insight...I think. It's one thing to list a skill or a technology on your resume, but it's another thing to be able to ask deep, challenging, technical questions around it.
As a bonus, being able to come up with and ask good questions is itself a valuable skill.
The Pineapple Finally Fruits!
It's finally happened! My pineapple is finally flowering WOOOOOOOOOOO!
I can't even believe it. I didn't even notice it until I randomly looked over and took note that I probably need to water it.
I started this plant some 3-4 years ago now (after my previous one died due to exposure to the cold) and it's FINALLY bearing a flower (in the middle of frickin' winter no less!). I am very much looking forward to eating this pineapple
Airline Boarding and How to Make It Suck Less
Caught an unexpected segment in the news on airline boarding (ending is great):
I've mostly had (terrible) experiences with boarding Continental flights and I've often thought why the process is so screwed up. I've come up with the following conclusions myself:
- Problem: Last time I flew out of John Wayne International, literally 3/4 of the flight was "Elite" status. So when they did the pre-boarding, it was a huge throng of people boarding the plane at once, which negated the whole point of boarding the plane from the back first. There's something broken about the system here because it creates a weird paradox. Being able to board the plane faster is a "benefit" of Elite status, but by using this system, it extends the overall boarding time, thereby actually making those with Elite status spend an overall longer period of time sitting on the plane. Solution: Elite status is only used in consideration for upgrades and seat selection at check-in, not boarding order.
- Problem: Gate reps don't actually check the size of carry-ons. In some cases, preemptively removing larger carry-ons and forcing gate-checks would dramatically reduce overall boarding time since the large bag causes an additive delay effect. That is that it not only slows down the individual with the large bag, but also affects every passenger that boards after that passenger because a large bag taking up too much space forces "bin hunting". Solution: Actually enforce the existing rules? Seems too simple to be true.
- Problem: No one keeps their outerwear until the boarding process is over. Nothing more frustrating than people stuffing their outerwear in the overhead before everyone has boarded. This takes up valuable overhead bin space and, again, delays the boarding process for everyone that comes afterwards by forcing bin hunting. Solution: Add coat hooks on the seats and people will more likely just hook their outerwear on the back of the seat for easy access.
- Problem: Some people just don't give a damn what the gate rep calls -- they're just going to get onto the plane anyways. Solution: See below.
- Problem: Because of a combination of the above, it often causes folks to end up back-tracking and bin-hunting. Sometimes, it also causes folks to preemptively place their carry-ons in forward rows, thinking that there is no space in the back rows, which only further exacerbates the situation. Solution: See below
The whole process is generally full of chaos, completely inefficient, and seems dated -- as if no one has stopped to think about these issues and how to solve them for decades. So it's interesting to see this guy -- Dr. Steffen -- propose something new. But it got me thinking that this guy's method still has an issue: it's not realistic for gate reps to call out this seating scheme (one row, one aisle at a time). Yet this is what it demands as the process breaks down if you have passengers in row n-2 blocking passengers in row n. Furthermore, the Steffen method makes an assumption about the nature of people: that they will obey order and think in the best interest of everybody. When the gate rep calls the aisles for rows n, n-2, n-4, n-6, all of those folks are going to rush the counter at once in a single mass.
So I think an extension or more realistic approach to this method is necessary to get it to work: a new passenger queue system at the gate. It should be -- like a plane -- one center aisle with several color-coded lines on each side of the aisle and just have people queue up in "bins" first. It shouldn't match the rows in count, but should be at a 1:3 ratio per bin. In essence, it's a modified block boarding pattern, but we break it down within the block so that, for example, window aisle passengers in the block are in bin "Purple", middle seat passengers are in bin "Blue", and aisle seat passengers are in bin "Green".
The gate rep would call bin "Purple 1" to board the window seat passengers in the rear of the plane. Then call "Purple 2" to queue the passengers in the window seat in the middle of the plane, then call "Purple 3" to queue the passengers in the window seat near the front of the plane. However, the real efficiency is in having the folks get into the bins first, before they are queued up. The current Continental system results in 60 people all standing around, blocking the entrance of the queue when all that's needed is a bin system so they know where to line up.
This system acknowledges that the ideal boarding pattern cannot be achieved in real life and thus only attempts to gain efficiency by segmenting the users by zone in a pre-boarding line first. Now everyone isn't standing around in one big mass, blocking the boarding line and rushing the line as soon as their block is called. It's a hybrid of block and WILMA (which is what the Steffen method is) but not as granular as the Steffen method and adds an extra layer of organization at the gate to account for real-world considerations.
Confessions of a Sriracha Fanatic
The smidgens and dabs became double-fisted squeezes and dripping spoonfuls. The table was not fully set until the squeeze bottle was centrally placed between the salt and pepper shakers. I carried breath mints in my bag to mask the telltale scent of garlic on my breath. Any savory item at all hours of the day was a candidate for a squirt of sauce.
I knew I had crossed the line when one day I found myself squirting a little red sauce on dark chocolate. I looked in the mirror and took a deep breath as I wiped a trail of red sauce dribbling from my mouth. At that moment, I realized I had transformed from a sriracha-ignorant food snob into a full-blown rooster addict. Hello, my name is Lynda and I am addicted to sriracha. There: I said it.
Why the USPS SHOULD Lose Money
The whole fracas over the USPS losing money has been overwhelming lately with the predictable arguments from the Right citing it as another example of Government Failure and a system that is better served by fully private corporations -- not this funky implicitly government backed entity.
Let's forget all of the other details for now like the decline in mail volume and the odd requirement that the USPS fully fund its pension plan. Forget the odd restrictions that Congress has placed around the USPS and how it runs its ship.
Forget all of that for a moment. It occurred to me a while back when sifting through the tons of junk mail that I get, the USPS is a business subsidy.
Yes. Those credit card offers? Those coupon mailers? Flyers and ads? Brochures? Would it be possible for small businesses (and big businesses) to afford these services if the USPS charged a fee that actually covered the costs of running a profit at the USPS? In that sense, the USPS is important as a small business subsidy as physical addresses are easily enumerated whereas email addresses are much more "ethereal". Not everyone watches TV. Not everyone listens to radio. Not everyone has Internet access. But every person has a physical address that can be targeted for advertising.
I mean, of the volume of mail that I receive, I would guess that over 80% of it would be what we consider "spam" in this digital age. But it's different from "spam" in that the coupons and ads are typically much more relevant. I've used many local service providers (plumbers, gutter cleaners, driveway sealers, landscapers), visited local merchants, and patronized local restaurants based on coupons and promotions I've received in the mail.
I conclude that proposing that the USPS curtail services or charge higher rates is tantamount to proposing placing a tax on businesses which will especially impact small/local businesses.
What I’ll Remember Most About Steve Jobs
I know I'm about a week late to the whole Jobs retirement story, but as I saw Ford's new Evos concept, I was reminded of an article I read on Jobs back in 2005 that stuck with me:
Ask Apple CEO Steve Jobs about it, and he'll tell you an instructive little story. Call it the Parable of the Concept Car. "Here's what you find at a lot of companies," he says, kicking back in a conference room at Apple's gleaming white Silicon Valley headquarters, which looks something like a cross between an Ivy League university and an iPod. "You know how you see a show car, and it's really cool, and then four years later you see the production car, and it sucks? And you go, What happened? They had it! They had it in the palm of their hands! They grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory!
"What happened was, the designers came up with this really great idea. Then they take it to the engineers, and the engineers go, 'Nah, we can't do that. That's impossible.' And so it gets a lot worse. Then they take it to the manufacturing people, and they go, 'We can't build that!' And it gets a lot worse."
Alan Simpson on “Western Conservatism”
In the Michelle-Bachmann-I'll-eat-your-brains-stare issue of Newsweek (8/15), there's a great interview with Alan Simpson, a former Republican Senator from Wyoming:
You and Cheney represent an old tradition of Western conservatism. What happened to those views?
I say clearly, abortion is a terrible, terrible thing, but it's a deeply intimate and personal decision, and I don't think men legislators should even vote on it. Now, that takes you immediately from a conservative to a commie. Now I also think that we all have someone we love who's gay or lesbian. There should be no special prejudices, no special penalties, no special privileges. And so that'll knock you into the commie box, too.
One would like to think that Simpson is speaking in hyperbole, but it's the sad truth of the current state of "conservative" politics.
TFS – Does It Suck?
I'm not sure, but I don't want to find out either.
I'm currently tasked with recommending a new source control platform and a new defect tracking platform as well.
I'm late to this post from March 2010, but Martin Fowler posted an internal ThoughtWorks survey of version control tools:
I conducted the survey from February 23 2010 until March 3 2010 on the ThoughtWorks software development mailing list. I got 99 replies. In the survey I asked everyone to rate a number of version control tools...
...there's a clear cluster around Subversion, git, and Mercurial with high approval and a large amount of responses. It's also clear that there's a big divide in approval between those three, together with Bazaar and Perforce, versus the rest.
The biggest offender? TFS with a 0% (yes, z-e-r-o) approval from the ThoughtWorks staff. Scary.
James McKay provides an interesting take on it:
Team Foundation Server advocates claim it’s unfair to compare TFS to other source control tools, since it’s not just source control, but an integrated end-to-end application lifecycle management solution. Comparing TFS to, say, Subversion, is like comparing Microsoft Office to Notepad, so they say.
Now where have I heard something like that before? Oh yes, Lotus Notes:
The main focus for frustration is Notes’s odd way with email, and its unintuitive interface. But to complain about that is to miss the point, says Ben Rose, founder and leader of the UK Notes User Group (www.lnug.org.uk). He’s a Notes administrator, for “a large automotive group”.
It’s regarded by many as an email program, but it’s actually groupware,” Rose explains. “It does do email, and calendaring, but can host discussion forums, and the collaboration can extend to long-distance reporting. It will integrate at the back end with huge systems. It’s extremely powerful.”
The thing is, it wasn’t the detractors who were missing the point. It was the Lotus Notes guys. You see, e-mail is right at the heart of any groupware application. It’s the part of the application that users interact with the most. It’s where usability matters the most. And it’s what Notes got wrong the most.
Is TFS really that bad? I haven't used it or recommended it (mostly out of concern for cost), but 0% approval?
On a related note, I've been digging into Redmine the last few days to try to examine its suitability for a project that I'm taking over and new products that I'll be bringing online. I've been really impressed with it, even compared to the excellent Trac. Compared to Trac, Redmine just feels more well put thought out (i.e. native support for multiple types of source control systems, native sub-projects, so on) and the UI is a bit cleaner and easier to use. I expect to be blogging about it frequently in the coming months.
Straight Talk from Fareed Zakaria
An excellent interview from NPR with Fareed Zakaria.
Straight talk about the problems that the US is facing and the straightforward solutions that are being defeated by politics and ideology instead of pragmatism.
No better way to spend 45 minutes today.



