Using coding tests to hire developers is like asking a CPA to complete an arithmetic quiz.
I get where you’re coming from, but I think coding tests can still be helpful if designed well. It’s not just about gauging raw ability—it’s about seeing how someone approaches a problem, communicates their thought process, and adapts to new challenges. A good coding test isn’t just FizzBuzz; it’s a way to check if someone understands the basics and how they think beyond them.
Of course, it’s important to pair that with other factors, like their past projects and how they collaborate. What do you think would be a better way to assess technical skills without falling into the "arithmetic quiz" trap?
Is "cramming" the same as "learning"? Is knowing the chemical reaction between an acid and baking soda the same as being a world class patissier? Many of these exercises are like "demonstrate that you can make this dough rise" but not actually considering "can you make an artful and delicious pastry"; the two are totally different. The most surprising thing when asked about their experience was that most of the detai…
You can only get so far as a pastry chef knowing the recipes. Understanding the chemistry does take your craft to a higher level. I’m never really surprised that there are so many security vulnerabilities out there. Tons of software is completely half-assed: slow, error-prone and inefficient. The market supports it because VCs keep pumping out companies that throw spaghetti at the wall until something sticks. And it…
Totally agree! the pastry chef analogy is spot on. It feels like hiring tests are often misaligned with the actual work. Instead of abstract puzzles, we should focus on role-specific challenges that reflect real-world tasks. And yeah, hiring people who only know frameworks without the fundamentals just adds to the problem. How do you think we can shift that balance?
Have you ever tried to hire developers? I have, many times. It's shocking how incapable most people with a history of working as senior developers for 10+ years are at basic programming questions. I'm talking about stuff at the level of Fizz Buzz, or barely more difficult, being solved in a language of their choice with ample time. Through all of the technical interviews I've run on behalf of multiple companies, I've…
That sounds like a really challenging situation, and I can see how it would be disheartening to work in an environment like that. It makes me wonder if part of the problem lies in how companies approach technical growth and team dynamics. For example, instead of just identifying unproductive team members, do you think those people could have benefitted from structured mentorship or training programs? Or maybe clearer…
I have seen team members fall below expectations, or burnout, or otherwise become unproductive, but then recover. In every case, their manager was a key part of the solution (and sometimes a key part of the original problem). If a person is really stuck on their current work, it can be demoralizing to have it taken away and assigned to others, but it can also be a relief. One thing that I've seen help is to let devs be more self-directed. Try to nudge them towards things that are important for the business, but focus on doing that by really convincing them of the value of that work. If they don't want to do that work, try to understand why, and consider changing plans based off of that.