When do employers get to "how to properly write a job advertisement"? All these articles are only about what workers should do, not how companies fail again and again at writing a good description of the job.
E.g. "Describe your experience with software operations and running services in production" is a really bad question as it is too open ended and leads to name dropping. Asking for "engaging answers" judges the persons ability to write interesting novels instead of ability to solve (or avoid) problems.
Ditto with “How would you approach the design and implementation of new features for a production service?”. This question is way too generic and a proper answer could fill many books. There is so many different ways of doing this and depends a lot on what the software is used for. When benhoyt says "In short, don’t be generic" then at least he could take his own advice into account when writing questions.
An example response like "At Shopify [...] doubled click rate, from 15% to 27%" likely violate NDAs. I don't think companies like you to tell this to their competitor.
> When benhoyt says "In short, don’t be generic" then at least he could take his own advice into account when writing questions.
I actually agree with this: I think several of our questions could be improved and made more specific. On the other hand, we do want them to be somewhat open-ended so the writer has to think and can put their best foot forward (or not). I don't write these questions, but I'll try to provide some feedback to those who do.
"Don't be generic" applies to the employer with regards to renumeration. "Competitive" means nothing, give me a numerical range. This avoids a waste of time on both parties' behalf.
> When do employers get to "how to properly write a job advertisement"?
It is a very common topic. At work we get special training on it and tools to write better job advertisements.
> a really bad question as it is too open ended and leads to name dropping
It is definietly not a "job advertisement" or a description of a job. It is an interview question.
It is open ended, what is wrong with that? They are looking for someone who has experience in the domain, so they ask potential candidates what their experience is.
And how does it lead to "name dropping"? If all a candidate says is that they have worked at FamousPlace the right next question should be what specifically they have done there regarding running services in production. Same as if they say they have worked at NonamePlace.
We use Textio to help remove bias from job postings. It’s not great but helps with low hanging fruit. Just being aware of it helps avoid a lot of bias e.g. don’t write in tropes of crushing code.
E.g. "Describe your experience with software operations and running services in production" is a really bad question as it is too open ended and leads to name dropping. Asking for "engaging answers" judges the persons ability to write interesting novels instead of ability to solve (or avoid) problems.
Ditto with “How would you approach the design and implementation of new features for a production service?”. This question is way too generic and a proper answer could fill many books. There is so many different ways of doing this and depends a lot on what the software is used for. When benhoyt says "In short, don’t be generic" then at least he could take his own advice into account when writing questions.
An example response like "At Shopify [...] doubled click rate, from 15% to 27%" likely violate NDAs. I don't think companies like you to tell this to their competitor.