3 ms·

I'm giving paper coding tests that make sense to me, and I'm generally very happy with my recruiting. [...] I've passed people who completely screwed the test.

I'm giving paper coding tests that make sense to me, and I'm generally very happy with my recruiting. [...] I've passed people who completely screwed the test. I've failed people who nailed it in 5 minutes. When I read someone saying "I've taken countless interviews, and I don't get a job", I'm thinking: well, either he's been very unlucky (which happens), or there is something wrong with the guy's attitude. Yeah, must be their attitude. Not the arbitrary and biased test given by an interviewer who doesn't even realize it's arbitrary or biased or that they're selecting for qualities they personally think are important rather than whether the candidate can actually do the work.

mastratton3 10y ago
Coming from the other side of the process, even if a question may be arbitrary (Although, I'd argue a lot aren't) it can still be helpful in evaluating a candidate's thought process. Additionally, using the same questions on multiple candidates is a good way to actually cut bias out of the system as you have a lot more data points to evaluate responses against.
hackinthebochs 10y ago
> or that they're selecting for qualities they personally think are important But that explains one or a few failed interviews. Once it becomes a consistent trend you have to start looking at the common denominator.