This is a big problem for the industry. A developer essentially takes exams, under stressful conditions, every time he or she applies for a new job. However,

This is a big problem for the industry. A developer essentially takes exams, under stressful conditions, every time he or she applies for a new job. However, the developer rarely gets any feedback whatsoever, and often gets a one-line brush off. I completely understand why. Two very good reasons have been identified in the comments here: 1) it opens the company to litigation, and 2) the company's goal isn't to provide feedback, it's to find good candidates. Here's the problem, though - none of this makes things any better for a candidate who spent weeks or even months studying, took hours of in person exams, and is brushed off with a one line "not a match at this time". And after a few of these experiences, the candidate starts to give up on trying. Tech interview exams may deter people from interviewing, and may play a role in why developers with potential give up on the field entirely. http://www.fastcompany.com/3043082/most-creative-people/why-software-maker-fog-creek-is-helping-its-competitors-hire-women http://www.fastcompany.com/3043082/most-creative-people/why-... High tech employers almost universally claim that there is a severe shortage of candidates, and yet here we have a process that may be deterring developers from interviewing or even remaining in the field. There are solutions out there, but we're not going to get to them by saying "oh well, it would open us up to litigation, and that's not my job anyway". Well, true, you don't owe anyone a job or feedback, but the world sure doesn't owe high tech employers all the developers they want to hire either. So far, I really don't get the sense that the high tech industry has come to terms with the depth of its own role in why they are having so much trouble hiring.