> It is amazingly easy for BS artists to look good on references, credentials, and their presented track record. And yet fail fizzbuzz.
So what? Just fire them quickly. Or put people who aren't so naive in charge of the hiring process.
Most of the time the actual problem is that "hiring managers" aren't practicing their trade anymore, and even in a simple conversation aren't sufficiently able to sniff out extremely obvious underqualified candidates who wouldn't be able to solve fizzbuzz.
Here's perhaps a good test for hiring managers. Have them interview 10 people who would normally apply, and just have a conversation. Make sure at least one person can't solve fizzbuzz. Ask the hiring manager to predict whether each candidate can or can't solve fizzbuzz based on their conversation. Anything less than 100% predictive accuracy and you can't be a hiring manager.
I would hope so I guess, but apparently according to OP a lot of hiring managers are duped by people who give off the appearance of software engineering aptitude but who can't solve fizzbuzz.
So what? Just fire them quickly. Or put people who aren't so naive in charge of the hiring process.
Most of the time the actual problem is that "hiring managers" aren't practicing their trade anymore, and even in a simple conversation aren't sufficiently able to sniff out extremely obvious underqualified candidates who wouldn't be able to solve fizzbuzz.
Here's perhaps a good test for hiring managers. Have them interview 10 people who would normally apply, and just have a conversation. Make sure at least one person can't solve fizzbuzz. Ask the hiring manager to predict whether each candidate can or can't solve fizzbuzz based on their conversation. Anything less than 100% predictive accuracy and you can't be a hiring manager.