That's great to hear – my previous company did something pretty similar to this, except the onsite "technical" portion involved actually pairing with one of the

That's great to hear – my previous company did something pretty similar to this, except the onsite "technical" portion involved actually pairing with one of the team for an hour to add one of those features, then discussing that process with a second engineer to describe what we'd done together and why. I generally think this works well for a few reasons: 1. The take-home task lets us see if candidates meet a minimum standard of competency and generally follows good practice – do they test the solution, document it, write clear… of course, I think it's important that the size of this task is limited to avoid wasting candidates' time. 2. The on-site interview helps to make sure the candidate is able to discuss the work they're doing, collaborate with other technical staff, and communicate technical ideas well. It feels like the overall goal of an interview process is to ensure that the candidate is at the skill level they have communicated, and that they can work with others.