Rather than pick a new project, however, they'll take the same project further, incorporating feedback from the 1st interview.
Take-home interviews
41–50 of 295 posts
Re: Take-home interviews
#42Seems good, I like the choice. In discussions on this topic I see a lot of: "Programming on the spot is hard, let people program at home"! But then other people say "Why should I program for free at home, my resume clearly shows I am already a skilled programmer. All this will do is cater to young people without families, or those fresh out of school". I am not looking to hire devs right now, but I am thinking about…
I recently graduated from college and started looking for my first programming jobs. I ran into a ton of these "take home" interviews and they were some of the most stressful things I've ever done. The first one, they asked me to solve an incredibly complex math problem that I had no idea about so I struggled with it for 5 or so hours before giving up. Probably good that they didn't give me the job; if they were expe…
You did an 8 hour test for them at full concentration, and they didn't even get back to you?
Please name these idiots.
Re: Take-home interviews
#43Software developers huh! What other role requires you to complete an exam to be considered for a job (or even just an interview). Moreover a 4-8 hour exam with no syllabus. No 'past papers' etc.
I think this should stop. In it's place, developers can have a pet open-source project, which they submit with their application. The point is that the same project can be submitted for a hundred applications if needed, saving the candidate dozens or hundreds of hours of wasted time.
They could put that time into the project instead and even if they don't get a single offer, the open source community benefits, and the candidate got to do something interesting rather than convert roman numerals or aggregate an array.
I seriously wonder if we should all boycott dev tests. If they give a test, just give them a github link and say "Please review this as a good example of my work.". If they can't review code that isn't tied to a silly question maybe they are not worth working for.
I say this having done some such tests recently myself. (To be fair one of them said a Github submission is OK, I just didn't feel my Github was good enough at the time.). I kind of feel bad contributing to the madness!
Re: Take-home interviews
#44Seems good, I like the choice. In discussions on this topic I see a lot of: "Programming on the spot is hard, let people program at home"! But then other people say "Why should I program for free at home, my resume clearly shows I am already a skilled programmer. All this will do is cater to young people without families, or those fresh out of school". I am not looking to hire devs right now, but I am thinking about…
> Offer $500 as a 1099 contractor to complete the assignment within the next 2 weeks or so. Just as an aside, I would actually be more willing to undertake this type of interview if you weren't paying me. I don't have any ethical qualms about interviewing while working a full-time engineering job, but I'm not entirely comfortable taking a contracting job under the table. It may be something of a symbolic gesture give…
Just FYI, "under the table" means getting paid without proper documentation or withholding of taxes, FICA, etc. Doesn't really apply to 1099 situations.
Re: Take-home interviews
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its good in theory, but it leaves a lot of ambiguity for the interviewee to parse through. For instance, if given a two week window would it look better for me to do it tonight? Would it show ambition? Or would it seem like I'm desperate, and lead to a lower amount of compensation being offered to me? Should I spend far longer then five hours on the assignment, and turn in superior work while making it seem like I on…
Good points. If you really care about being impartial, maybe have the 2 week period and a blind submission method in which the interviewer does not see when the assignment was completed.
But my rent is due the Friday after next and I need to know if I should send out another wave of resumes.
It isn't but it strikes me we are looking very hard to find a new way to do things, when the old way was pretty damn good.
Sit me down and talk about technology for ~thirty minutes. If I don't have the social skills to successfully do this (minority issue) I likely would not be able to communicate well with a team and thus should not be a candidate anyways. You will then know immediately whether you want to hire me (or progress me to another round) or not.
I then get a call two days later and can progress with my life.
People pretend like all this hiring strategy is for the good of the candidate. It's not. As with everything else its for the good of the company and its investors.
Here's a thought:
Invest in a competent hiring manager who can see through applicant bull shit and identify talent within a reasonable range. Includes basic negotiation skills. And assume the rightful risk that is employing another human being.
Re: Take-home interviews
#46I thought Gayle Laakman McDowell, who wrote "Cracking the Coding Interview", wrote a good article about the problems of take-home interviews.
http://www.gayle.com/blog/2013/09/18/companies-who-give-cand...
At the core of the problem is that this approach can be used to burn a lot of a candidate's time without an equivalent investment from the company.
I've mentioned this before - I applied (maybe 5 years ago) to a company that first asked me to take a Java test (about 1 hour of work). Then the recruiter called me and sent me a take home project that should take "5-7 hours". I did this, crickets chirped for a month, though I did check in with the recruiter for a while (I gave up eventually). Finally the recruiter called me with a one-line brush off "we've decided not to move forward at this time…"
Granted, this was a bad experience, and it won't always be like this. But I'm pretty close to saying "never" to these exams.
I thought Gayle's suggestions were good. She goes so far as to suggest a 90% passage rate - that you should not be giving these tests to people who are unlikely to pass then, using them to confirm, not screen.
Re: Take-home interviews
#47Gauging ability to operate under pressure is valuable too...ever tried to fix a bug on a device that was supposed to ship yesterday, under the pressure of the entirety of the hierarchy above you all the way up to the CxO? It helps to know if the candidate you hire will handle that, or fall apart just when you need him/her to do the job he/she is paid for.
Um, you really can't interview for that person, thanks. That person is someone who is already in your company and gets promoted to "trusted lieutenant". Promotion to "completely trusted lieutenant" is only awarded posthumously. :)
If that kind of situation is happening more than once in a blue moon, something is very wrong at your company.
Re: Take-home interviews
#48Take home interviews are a great indicator of a company's hubris. "Its so awesome to work here people are going to jump at the chance to do my 3 hour homework assignment".
The problem with them is fundamental: "You will only get someone desperate enough to take your exam."
If the person is qualified they will be swimming in opportunities and will likely throw your exam directly in the trash heap. If they aren't you probably don't want them working for you. I suppose these might work if the entire industry colluded on it but then ... prisoner's dilemma.
Maybe a more useful indicator is weeding out the candidates that didn't say "no thanks." Cause really why are they so desperate for a job and why do they have all this free time? but then ... ethics.
Re: Take-home interviews
#49Software developers huh! What other role requires you to complete an exam to be considered for a job (or even just an interview). Moreover a 4-8 hour exam with no syllabus. No 'past papers' etc. I think this should stop. In it's place, developers can have a pet open-source project, which they submit with their application. The point is that the same project can be submitted for a hundred applications if needed, savin…
Sounds good in theory. But if enough companies started doing this, I can guarantee you that Indian companies will spring that will offer to create an open source project for you for $100 to $1000 depending on complexity of project, and amount of activity the github profile would show.
I wish I was kidding.
Re: Take-home interviews
#50Software developers huh! What other role requires you to complete an exam to be considered for a job (or even just an interview). Moreover a 4-8 hour exam with no syllabus. No 'past papers' etc. I think this should stop. In it's place, developers can have a pet open-source project, which they submit with their application. The point is that the same project can be submitted for a hundred applications if needed, savin…
Many other fields require competency tests. What other field requires you to do a potentially unbounded amount of free work in the open and give it away to everybody?
Not everybody has any major projects on Github. The lack thereof does not signal lack of programming aptitude. If somebody has done a lot of great work, but it was all for employers and clients, that doesn't mean they would do poor work for you if you were their employer or client. I find that suggestion much more distasteful than having relevant work-sample tests.