←back to thread

Please stop the coding challenges

(blackentropy.bearblog.dev)
261 points CrazyEmi | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
fishtoaster ◴[] No.42149357[source]
I recently ran an interview process for a relatively senior eng role at a tiny startup. Because I believe different interview methods work better for different people, I offered everyone a choice:

1. Do a takehome test, targeted to take about 4 hours but with no actual time limit. This was a non-algorithmic project that was just a stripped-down version of what I'd spent the last month on in actual work.

2. Do an onsite pairing exercise in 2 hours. This would be a version of #1, but more of "see how far we get in 2 hours."

3. Submit a code sample of pre-existing work.

Based on the ire I've seen takehome tests get, I figured we'd get a good spread between all three, but amazingly, ~90-95% of candidates chose the takehome test. That matches my preference as a candidate as well.

I don't know if this generalizes beyond this company/role, but it was an interesting datapoint - I was very surprised to find that most people preferred it!

replies(7): >>42149441 #>>42149536 #>>42149571 #>>42149636 #>>42150136 #>>42150254 #>>42151318 #
commandlinefan ◴[] No.42149636[source]
> ~90-95% of candidates chose the takehome test

I was expecting "3. submit a code sample" to be the overwhelming winner here - did anybody choose that? Seems like a no-brainer, since it's already done...

replies(5): >>42149676 #>>42149882 #>>42150330 #>>42150994 #>>42151663 #
1. SCUSKU ◴[] No.42149676[source]
The code I've written in personal projects have been pretty messy -- whereas code I've written professionally tend to be better (not perfect), but of course I can't share that code.

On the employer side, I would prefer the take home assignment over existing code, unless the existing code was super high quality or highly relevant to the company.