Vitaliy wrote:

> Out of about six candidates that took the test, only one was able to
> correctly answer all the questions. 

If you really get so many way-below-qualification resumes that can't be
detected clearly on paper, such a simple test makes a lot of sense. Someone
who can't answer a few really simple questions doesn't even have to be
interviewed. 

> The last engineer we hired didn't have to take a test, but only because I
> saw the project that he did for the student project fair (he also
> brought work samples to the interview).

That's probably the deal. You'll know a good engineer when you talk to
him/her. You 'feel' the substance. The test is just to weed out the ones
you don't even have to talk to.

That Joel article may not be realistic in one point. He says to 'just say
no' when you're not sure you got the right person. But sometimes you need
to get a job done, can't do it yourself, and don't seem to find the 'right'
one -- which sounds like your situation with the graphics designer. And
sooner or later you'll need to give the job to someone; which may not be
the 'right' one. Engineering compromises :)

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist