To be frank, the job of a hiring decision-maker isn't to treat candidates fairly, it's to hire the best fit for the role based on the available signals. It's the job of the candidate to send the best signals they can, however they go about doing that. One thing we'll probe for in our interviews with more experienced candidates is what kind of experience/lessons they have from their former employers, for example, and that can weigh in their favor if there's conceivable overlap with what we're doing.
But I would say don't give any single signal undue weight. Side projects are nice, but not mandatory. Heck, we've even hired people who bombed our programming test because they did okay in the post-test interview (where we'll usually see if they can work out where their solution failed).
While it is unfortunate that side projects have some selection bias against those who are time-poor, it also feels wrong to me to discriminate against people who can demonstrate their skills and impress through their side projects.
Like, if there are two candidates and all else are equal, and one has a really impressive side project that demonstrates positive traits (whether it's technical expertise, novelty, relevant skills, or communication/community), it's going to be hard to... actively ignore that?
In 15 years I've had 1 side project. I'm a staff engineer.
It's just an additional piece of signal that may help a candidate when relevant; the same way doing great during the interview can help a candidate.
I’ve also had people show me pics of their wood working, mountains climbed, hunting trophies, and even 3d models. I think only one time did someone say they did nothing but take care of their spouse. We talked about that, as I have some experience there. My job is to see how you solve problems and ensure they’re compatible with our problems, along with skill set, etc.
The other thing that it might be is rational pessimism. A lot of ideas would take a phenomenal amount of work, and as a senior you probably see those pitfalls and that work right at the beginning, while someone more junior might attack a problem - and eventually succeed precisely because of their irrational optimism.
There was a fun quote on the Alexander long Piano story:
> I think because I was so young I absolutely knew it was totally possible to do, I was fully determined and without consulting any professionals I had no barrier stopping me.
I think the implication there is that if he had consulted professionals, the enormity of what he was taking on might well have crushed the idea.
> I have pages of side project ideas
Well evidently not for you. But please don't assume everybody's mind or personality works the same way yours does. You were told to not judge everybody by the same subjective yardstick and your immediate response is to.. project and judge everybody by the same yardstick.
The ability to generate side project ideas or the interest in investing huge amounts of time into a project on your own time are largely orthogonal to the ability to actually build things when it's your job.
The point I evidently failed to get across was that there are lots of ideas around and you don't need to generate them yourself. People who like generating ideas generate far more than they can hope to work on and often would love to see others carry them forward.
I consider myself senior, but I haven't really lost my optimism. I don't think becoming a senior should mean losing optimism. For me it's the opposite. I have much better understanding how to achieve something than before so I have the confidence that I can definitely do it. Maybe it's my personality though, that instead of thinking what the obstacles are, I think how I'm going to visualize and build it.
But I can see how it's different from plenty of other folks, and I think it comes down to personality. Usually I don't or can't think of challenges/weaknesses up front and I like to just dive in. I have been criticized and given feedback of having this flaw, but I have unrelenting belief, that I can solve everything on the fly and for me it has worked in the past.
It's like my mind is unable to bother or concentrate on what the obstacles will be. And it's frustrating because many people expect you to come up with a plan and potential obstacles beforehand while my mind just wants to jump in.
Most advice tells you to think/ask questions/plan before you code, but I code while thinking and iterate on that code. I can't think or concentrate if I'm not coding or actively solving the problem. If I try to plan something, it's half-assed and to me it seems useless and it kind of pretends to be a viable plan and when I finally do it, I do it completely different from the plan anyhow.
Not saying it's the right way, but maybe it's some sort of thing similar to ADHD where I just can't focus without building. And I am very impatient as well so if there's something that needs to be built or solved I will need to jump on it asap and get it solved asap. If I'm not building and am planning I have this increasing anxiety, that I should just be doing it.
More specifically:
How do you handle collaborating with other teams if / when your work is a dependency for them delivering theirs?
How do you deal with requirements, use cases, and other pieces of functionality if you just jump into coding?
This has happened to me sometimes.
It depends on how much time you spend on side projects I guess. It also helps for me to have a fixed work schedule.
For a while indoor 'cycling home' as I did when I went into an office more worked well to delineate the day, shower, and get on with something of my own feeling refreshed. I still do it, but I suppose I'm used to the feeling or whatever, I don't really find the same benefit any more.
Meanwhile, if you ignore the side project, that candidate isn't disadvantaged as a result. They're just given the same consideration as the other candidate, not more and not less.
How you choose between the two at that point is perhaps more difficult, but the playing field is still level. The single parent still has a fighting chance against the person who has the time and money to do extra work for themselves.
The better question is if one candidate has a strong set of work experience but no side projects, and another candidate has an underwhelming set of work experience but a strong set of side projects, does one get valued over the other or are they given equal weight?
If they aren't given equal weight, do you understand the reasoning why (or is it just because they think side projects are cool and want people like themselves).
I love hearing about non-professional things. Coding outside of work is actually a negative for me, because I assume you are going to get burnt out. I WANT you to have a life outside of work, because A) you are human and deserve that, and B) you are more productive during work. I'm fine if you take a few days off to run an ultra-marathon, or take off a few hours early to catch your kid's baseball game, or care for a family member, whatever. Well-rounded people are better at writing software, in my experience, and better to work with.
And side projects are side projects. I was fascinated by a candidate's beer brewing project (there are some very relatable skills in management and organisation, supply chain dependencies, etc) as one example of a non-tech side project.
(Unless, of course, this candidate was starting a brewery, in which case, that is a hobby turned side project.)
There’s nothing unfair about preferring to hire someone who’s personal time is spent working in the same field as their job. All things being equal, I’ll pick that candidate over the alternative as it demonstrates genuine interest in the field as a pursuit, not just a career.
This is true and should be considered, but it’s also kind of the part. If the goal is to find the best candidate, then discriminating against people who won’t have as much time to do side projects, read, study and train more, etc will be likely.
I think it’s fair to consider these things and candidates shouldn’t be treated equally in this way.
It could be a home automation project or applying tech to another interest.
It’s entirely up to the individual to take initiative in their own self directed learning.
Quality is far more important than quantity.
Some of the best engineers I've worked with had exactly none, and very full lives outside of work. But you could tell they punched above their weight just by looking at the resume.
It is really no different then working overtime same amount of hours.
I could do 2 hours of productivity after the kids go to sleep and I'd still have 2 hours for entertainment. I exercise too.
So let's make it even more reasonable. How about 30 minutes, 4 times a week?
>Meaningful progress
So then do an hour or 2? I make progress in 30 minutes and sometimes keep going. If the point is for a resume, you could even do a 1 or 2 week sprint.
I suppose you could even work on it while the kids are awake. My kids love Alphablocks.
If you don't have a personal side project, the issue isn't children. It's desire.
i much rather do something else. play a videogame, read a book, watch series. i already work 8~10h a day, after that, i want chill and think about something else that is not code.
Btw have you considered something drastically different than your current code? Embedded comes to mind, it's half electrical engineering and lots of instant gratification.
But in general, nonfiction books could help you ace an interview. I wowd some people by merely talking taoist philosophy and how despite having diverse skills, there's something to be said about sticking to your role.
You forgot the second part of my sentence:
> or who choose to pursue non-IT hobbies to keep a work-life balance
Beyond that and the burnout is real.
I can hardly imagine how someone could build anything at 2h/week. 30 min is barely enough time for the brain to switch gears.
I fully get how someone does not have time for side projects - they have life besides work, while I barely do.
Both count for the interview purposes.
Coincidentally I wrote some notes about resume building a few days ago: https://simonwillison.net/2021/Jul/17/standing-out/