4 ms·

We tried it and while it does help to filter out completely clueless people, however cheating is a real problem. This clearly depends on the industry and specif

We tried it and while it does help to filter out completely clueless people, however cheating is a real problem. This clearly depends on the industry and specifics of the position, but out of three people that hired, two clearly cheated on the remote coding test. This was for a C position in embedded context, and one would think that no one in their sane mind would cheat, and still many people did. So, yeah, good idea, but use with caution as YMMV.

chrisaycock 16y ago
> out of three people that hired, two clearly cheated on the remote coding test What screening did you do onsite?
- huhtenberg 16y ago
  No, all from other cities. Sent the task over email and wanted to get a solution back in 8 hours or less.
  - chrisaycock 16y ago
    Right, I mean after the remote coding test, did you bring them onsite for another battery of screening?
    - huhtenberg 16y ago
      We had several phone interviews - one technical before the test, one - after and another one with HR, and then CTO insisted on hiring and flying them over right away. With a three month probation period... that did come handy. So basically the first two weeks were the on-site screening if you will, and which they spectacularly failed.
      - chrisaycock 16y ago
        Ok, that makes a lot more sense then.
dblumenfeld 16y ago
We tried it and cheating happens, but for us it was bearable. We were running candidates through Codility as the very first level of screening (3 programming problems to be solved from home), then through 2 or 3 interviews. People were cheating on a test once in a while, but not badly enough to spoil the whole filtering process. At some point we started sending out a welcome e-mail before the screening session to make it clear that cheating is nothing more than a recipe for a seriously bad interview, that you really do not want to have. Helped somewhat, but still somebody cheats once in a while. I guess such is life.

chrisaycock 16y ago

> out of three people that hired, two clearly cheated on the remote coding test What screening did you do onsite?

huhtenberg 16y ago
No, all from other cities. Sent the task over email and wanted to get a solution back in 8 hours or less.
- chrisaycock 16y ago
  Right, I mean after the remote coding test, did you bring them onsite for another battery of screening?
  - huhtenberg 16y ago
    We had several phone interviews - one technical before the test, one - after and another one with HR, and then CTO insisted on hiring and flying them over right away. With a three month probation period... that did come handy. So basically the first two weeks were the on-site screening if you will, and which they spectacularly failed.
    - chrisaycock 16y ago
      Ok, that makes a lot more sense then.

dblumenfeld 16y ago

We tried it and cheating happens, but for us it was bearable. We were running candidates through Codility as the very first level of screening (3 programming problems to be solved from home), then through 2 or 3 interviews. People were cheating on a test once in a while, but not badly enough to spoil the whole filtering process. At some point we started sending out a welcome e-mail before the screening session to make it clear that cheating is nothing more than a recipe for a seriously bad interview, that you really do not want to have. Helped somewhat, but still somebody cheats once in a while. I guess such is life.