3 ms·

You are overthinking this. All that matters is that the candidate does have a basic competency in algorithms (#0, we were looking for programmers, not just typi

You are overthinking this. All that matters is that the candidate does have a basic competency in algorithms (#0, we were looking for programmers, not just typists); anything beyond that was completely optional (and I believe I have written as much) and a way to get the interview flowing to expectations of both sides. However, if your position is "I believe you want one specific textbook answer to the problem from me, and I refuse to do anything at all instead of risking what I think the interviewer would see as incorrect, even partially," you'd be at a wrong interview: the hidden goal is "let's find some technical problem to talk about, we wish to see an approximation of your problem-solving skills; if that approximation is 'freeze indecisively,' that would hardly solve any problems." If you see making any mistake as a threat (instead of going back-and-forth to an optimal solution), you would burn out on the actual technical challenges of the job within a month - literally none of them had a single, perfect, by-the-book solution, each needed to be iteratively developed; cramming the Right Exam Answers wouldn't have helped you on that job, as there weren't any. Edit: perhaps such person would feel better in a tester/QA position, but does not really strike me as fit for developing (development's usual cycle of trying many things, finding that many of them are not applicable and trying something else, seems like outright torture for someone who needs to have the perfect answer right from the start). Therefore, both sides would find out early, at the interview; in this respect the question would serve its purpose well.

ordu 9y ago
> All that matters is that the candidate does have a basic competency in algorithms; anything beyond that is completely optional (and I believe I have written as much). What it means "optional"? Either this options have their influence on your decision, or have no. If they have, than they are not optional. If they does not influence, than they are not options. You are speaking about them, it means for me that they are not completely unimportant. > If you already see making any mistake as a threat (instead of going back-and-forth to an optimal solution), you would burn out on the actual technical challenges within a month... A mistake in competing environment and a mistake in collaborative environment are different kinds of mistakes and leads to different feeling. If your working environment is a collaborative one, but candidates see your tests as competing environment, than you are measuring something that does not matter. > cramming the Right Exam Answers wouldn't have helped you on that job, as there weren't any. Yes! I do talk about the same. Exam strategies learnt by candidate is not interesting to you, but by making from tests a stressful competing experience for candidate you probably measuring this strategies, not the other strategies which are more relevant to you.
- Piskvorrr 9y ago
  Optional, as in "does not have a significant impact on the interview, i.e. not a binary hire/no hire issue." Interviews are, from my experience, stressful for both sides, at least at the beginning: we have used this simple task as a way to get a conversation going. If, on the other hand, we had met a candidate who would insist that we're doing this just to stress them and that everything is a trap, we would probably be worried that meeting an actual problem on the job might be too much strain on their nerves.

ordu 9y ago

> All that matters is that the candidate does have a basic competency in algorithms; anything beyond that is completely optional (and I believe I have written as much). What it means "optional"? Either this options have their influence on your decision, or have no. If they have, than they are not optional. If they does not influence, than they are not options. You are speaking about them, it means for me that they are not completely unimportant. > If you already see making any mistake as a threat (instead of going back-and-forth to an optimal solution), you would burn out on the actual technical challenges within a month... A mistake in competing environment and a mistake in collaborative environment are different kinds of mistakes and leads to different feeling. If your working environment is a collaborative one, but candidates see your tests as competing environment, than you are measuring something that does not matter. > cramming the Right Exam Answers wouldn't have helped you on that job, as there weren't any. Yes! I do talk about the same. Exam strategies learnt by candidate is not interesting to you, but by making from tests a stressful competing experience for candidate you probably measuring this strategies, not the other strategies which are more relevant to you.

Piskvorrr 9y ago
Optional, as in "does not have a significant impact on the interview, i.e. not a binary hire/no hire issue." Interviews are, from my experience, stressful for both sides, at least at the beginning: we have used this simple task as a way to get a conversation going. If, on the other hand, we had met a candidate who would insist that we're doing this just to stress them and that everything is a trap, we would probably be worried that meeting an actual problem on the job might be too much strain on their nerves.