Where is the fine line between coding tests and spec work?
I'm not a programmer, but I've seen startups co-founded by engineers try hiring designers in a similar fashion to I assume programmers as they test designers with a variety of unpaid projects. I've found it to be pretty annoying given that I've already shown a portfolio of work and it's not unlike spec work. I get that some people may have fabricated their history, but that's why some companies do a trial period before committing to a full-time gig.
If I ask someone to implement a linked list during 1hr interview, it's clear that it's not because I need a linked list implementation in my company.
If I ask someone to stay for a week to work on the company's code base, that's clearly a work that should be paid for at a market rate.
Similarly, I'm pretty sure that you, as a designer, know without a doubt when company's request crosses the line from "I need to make sure you know what you're doing" to "I need you to do free work for me".
I don't like all their advice, but one thing that 37Signals does in this situation is just pay the person whatever rate they ask for. In the greater scheme of things, it's not a huge expense, and if you're to the point in the interview process where this actually makes sense, then you have a decent idea that this person is a candidate, and so you can invest a little in the process for everybody's benefit. It's a step beyond the whiteboarding "jump, monkey!" coding interview.
I was once asked a fairly involved technical question in an hour long interview - I later interviewed for a different group in the same organization and they mentioned the problem the other group had been having.
I talked about the solution I had proposed and was told - "oh yes, some consultant they had in suggested that and we tried it last week".
Comments
Where is the fine line between coding tests and spec work?
I'm not a programmer, but I've seen startups co-founded by engineers try hiring designers in a similar fashion to I assume programmers as they test designers with a variety of unpaid projects. I've found it to be pretty annoying given that I've already shown a portfolio of work and it's not unlike spec work. I get that some people may have fabricated their history, but that's why some companies do a trial period before committing to a full-time gig.
I don't think the line is fine.
If I ask someone to implement a linked list during 1hr interview, it's clear that it's not because I need a linked list implementation in my company.
If I ask someone to stay for a week to work on the company's code base, that's clearly a work that should be paid for at a market rate.
Similarly, I'm pretty sure that you, as a designer, know without a doubt when company's request crosses the line from "I need to make sure you know what you're doing" to "I need you to do free work for me".
I don't like all their advice, but one thing that 37Signals does in this situation is just pay the person whatever rate they ask for. In the greater scheme of things, it's not a huge expense, and if you're to the point in the interview process where this actually makes sense, then you have a decent idea that this person is a candidate, and so you can invest a little in the process for everybody's benefit. It's a step beyond the whiteboarding "jump, monkey!" coding interview.
I see no problem with trying to hire developers from the contributor pool of the open source projects my company has helped found.
I was once asked a fairly involved technical question in an hour long interview - I later interviewed for a different group in the same organization and they mentioned the problem the other group had been having.
I talked about the solution I had proposed and was told - "oh yes, some consultant they had in suggested that and we tried it last week".