5 ms·

You realize that this approach is flawed the moment there are blogposts / books ( e.g. Cracking the coding interview ) on how to crack it. The how to crack 'x'

You realize that this approach is flawed the moment there are blogposts / books ( e.g. Cracking the coding interview ) on how to crack it. The how to crack 'x' becomes a field altogether ( coaching / youtube videos / blogs / books etc ). Also, platforms like hackerrank are adding fuel to fire. I read the CEO write somewhere that he wished the below "were taught in schools : 1) Communicating complex ideas with clarity 2) Systems thinking 3) Grunt work tasks 4) Boundaryless thinking 5) Self-awareness / EQ" Please note almost all of these are not evaluated on their platform (they profit from coding tests) or during interviews and almost all are soft / intangible skills (skills which are not immediately obvious about the candidate during a typical programming interview). [ Side note : some could say that coding tests are the problem they have chosen to solve - in which case, why are they worried about these skills ? Are the companies seeing coders crack the tests on their platform, while not performing well on the above skills post hiring ? We could only speculate. ] All good work is done by teams, and to be effective in a team requires a lot of intangibles which aren't even assessed in a typical interview. A better approach could be from this article: https://leerob.io/blog/technical-recruiting-is-broken/ https://leerob.io/blog/technical-recruiting-is-broken/ Or : A couple of weeks of work with a task being assigned and the mentor or interviewer looking at how the candidate is approaching the problem and whether he is able to solve the problem within the time constraints (an easy task shouldn't take long, and a hard problem shouldn't be short circuited to give a sub-optimal solution.) and other such observable traits can be evaluated. My two cents! EDIT : Poor wording above (i.e., couple of weeks). A task should be assigned and evaluated post a time (which is ideal for task completion as per the interviewer). No constant interaction with the candidate and spending loads of time with that candidate - that isn't scalable when the demand-supply equation is imbalanced already. EDIT 2 : The idea above is not about spending weeks for recruitment. The idea was about being practical about the kind of questions / tasks that are given during interview (example : code a feature or fix an issue we have, as another user has suggested well in the comments). Took me a while to realize we have missed the point I tried to convey for the logistics of how it should be done.

thoman23 8y ago
> "A couple of weeks of work with a task being assigned" lol, OK
- rajeshmr 8y ago
  Sorry that didn't resonate with you. But i have replied to another comment explaining the idea further, do read it. Thanks for your reply.
selestify 8y ago
Who has time to spend a few weeks off from their full time job just to interview?
- rajeshmr 8y ago
  Hey, i have had a couple of recruiters who have approached with this idea. Basically, the recruiter says, okay i give you a week or two for this task to be complete ( the call is basically 30 mins or so explaining the problem and getting to know the basics about me ) and then post the time alloted, a sync up to see how you have solved it and to explain the design or solution or something like that. Only a couple of times have i had this experience. There is no additional overhead on the recruiter apart from reviewing it post the time alloted. It felt better, because the interview was more like a typical work like situation. In work too, we are assigned tasks, and we update the progress. Maybe its a bit idealistic, but then we all like to dream about utopia, don't we :)
  - pmiller2 8y ago
    I still wouldn’t do it. Why should I, when I can do the entire interview process with another company with only a day’s worth of time expenditure on my end? If the task itself takes more than an hour or so, I can get to an onsite interview with far less effort than that by doing a recruiter chat and a phone screen.
    - rajeshmr 8y ago
      Sounds fair enough :) Agreed. I have just proposed one of the alternatives which i could imagine / think of from the top of my mind. The problem isn't solved yet - or rather solved well yet. We could always brainstorm on a better alternative. :)
      - pmiller2 8y ago
        Here's the problem: you're dealing with a multiple prisoners' dilemma situation here. Theoretically, the best solution for all (candidates and companies) is to have a thorough, standardized, and real-world based interview process. If every company cooperated, then you could have that. But, when there are companies out there that will bring candidates onsite for ~5 hours after a little more than an hour's time commitment, that means I could theoretically do 5 of those interviews in a week. No other company is going to start demanding multiple days of an interviewee's time given that every other company's process takes ~1 day of active participation by the candidate. So, you need to limit your "thorough, standardized, and real-world" process to taking no more than a day. Here's a process that might work, that I actually would participate in: 1. ~20 minute recruiter chat to establish basic levels of fit/compatibility. 2. ~45-60 minute phone screen. 3. Onsite consisting of 1 hour behavioral/cultural interview, and 3-4 hour programming task, preferably based on a real problem or task that arose in the company's code base, suitably extracted, simplified, and scrubbed of proprietary information. Internet resources are allowed, as is asking any questions of the interviewer, without penalty. You could bring me in at 11 AM, do the behavioral interview, take me to lunch, then have the afternoon to do the programming task, and have me out by 4.
pmiller2 8y ago
I upvoted you based on the first 90% of your reply, but that last full paragraph is just silly. Sure, you can evaluate someone more fully in 2 weeks of working with them than in an afternoon of interviews, but who's going to spend 2 weeks working with you, just for the possibility of continued employment? No one who isn't both desperate and unemployed, that's who.
- rajeshmr 8y ago
  Hey i just replied to another similar comment. Please check it out and suggest your opinion. Am curious to know what you think :)
ambulancechaser 8y ago
"When your metric becomes a target it ceases to be a metric".
jorblumesea 8y ago
I mean, this is literally how any kind of industry with a test develops. Do you think the MCATs or the Bar exam are flawed because they have books on how to do well? Whenever there is any kind of standardization for testing, some ecosystem will evolve around it.
- rajeshmr 8y ago
  I shared a pattern. The problem is, the reversal of motives (Are you writing the test to demonstrate ability or fooling the system to move ahead or virtue signal ?) and the inconsequential nature of the test once there are "cracks" available. In our country, we have very competitive examinations conducted every year, and people have cracked it with high national level ranks without much understanding of the subject - thanks to tutoring institutes that spawned as a sub field to coach these people. I have also known a couple of people who aren't that smart ( when you talk to them in person ) but who wear badges of honor about their SAT scores etc.
- pmiller2 8y ago
  The big difference is you pass the MCAT or bar exam once, then never worry about it again.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - jorblumesea 8y ago
    That's not true, not every state shares or accepts Bar results from other states, and Doctors have medical board exams that also need to be studied for. If you are a lawyer or a doctor and are moving to a new state, you probably need to study.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - pmiller2 8y ago
      If you're a practicing physician and move to another state, you, in fact, probably do not have to retake licensure exams. Almost all states either have reciprocity agreements with at least a few other states, or will grant a license by endorsement to a physician who's licensed in another state and has practiced for a certain number of years. See http://www.visalaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/physicianchart.pdf http://www.visalaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/physicianc... Board exams are the same as MCATs in the sense that you take them once and forget about it. For lawyers, the situation isn't so rosy (which is to be expected, because law varies a lot per state), but there is quite a lot of reciprocity out there, and some states will offer an "attorney's exam" in lieu of a full bar exam. And, for some areas of law that are strictly federal, admission to the federal bar can be sufficient to practice in any state. It is not as hard as you make it out to be.

thoman23 8y ago

> "A couple of weeks of work with a task being assigned" lol, OK

rajeshmr 8y ago
Sorry that didn't resonate with you. But i have replied to another comment explaining the idea further, do read it. Thanks for your reply.

selestify 8y ago

Who has time to spend a few weeks off from their full time job just to interview?

rajeshmr 8y ago
Hey, i have had a couple of recruiters who have approached with this idea. Basically, the recruiter says, okay i give you a week or two for this task to be complete ( the call is basically 30 mins or so explaining the problem and getting to know the basics about me ) and then post the time alloted, a sync up to see how you have solved it and to explain the design or solution or something like that. Only a couple of times have i had this experience. There is no additional overhead on the recruiter apart from reviewing it post the time alloted. It felt better, because the interview was more like a typical work like situation. In work too, we are assigned tasks, and we update the progress. Maybe its a bit idealistic, but then we all like to dream about utopia, don't we :)
- pmiller2 8y ago
  I still wouldn’t do it. Why should I, when I can do the entire interview process with another company with only a day’s worth of time expenditure on my end? If the task itself takes more than an hour or so, I can get to an onsite interview with far less effort than that by doing a recruiter chat and a phone screen.
  - rajeshmr 8y ago
    Sounds fair enough :) Agreed. I have just proposed one of the alternatives which i could imagine / think of from the top of my mind. The problem isn't solved yet - or rather solved well yet. We could always brainstorm on a better alternative. :)
    - pmiller2 8y ago
      Here's the problem: you're dealing with a multiple prisoners' dilemma situation here. Theoretically, the best solution for all (candidates and companies) is to have a thorough, standardized, and real-world based interview process. If every company cooperated, then you could have that. But, when there are companies out there that will bring candidates onsite for ~5 hours after a little more than an hour's time commitment, that means I could theoretically do 5 of those interviews in a week. No other company is going to start demanding multiple days of an interviewee's time given that every other company's process takes ~1 day of active participation by the candidate. So, you need to limit your "thorough, standardized, and real-world" process to taking no more than a day. Here's a process that might work, that I actually would participate in: 1. ~20 minute recruiter chat to establish basic levels of fit/compatibility. 2. ~45-60 minute phone screen. 3. Onsite consisting of 1 hour behavioral/cultural interview, and 3-4 hour programming task, preferably based on a real problem or task that arose in the company's code base, suitably extracted, simplified, and scrubbed of proprietary information. Internet resources are allowed, as is asking any questions of the interviewer, without penalty. You could bring me in at 11 AM, do the behavioral interview, take me to lunch, then have the afternoon to do the programming task, and have me out by 4.

pmiller2 8y ago

I upvoted you based on the first 90% of your reply, but that last full paragraph is just silly. Sure, you can evaluate someone more fully in 2 weeks of working with them than in an afternoon of interviews, but who's going to spend 2 weeks working with you, just for the possibility of continued employment? No one who isn't both desperate and unemployed, that's who.

rajeshmr 8y ago
Hey i just replied to another similar comment. Please check it out and suggest your opinion. Am curious to know what you think :)

ambulancechaser 8y ago

"When your metric becomes a target it ceases to be a metric".

jorblumesea 8y ago

I mean, this is literally how any kind of industry with a test develops. Do you think the MCATs or the Bar exam are flawed because they have books on how to do well? Whenever there is any kind of standardization for testing, some ecosystem will evolve around it.

rajeshmr 8y ago
I shared a pattern. The problem is, the reversal of motives (Are you writing the test to demonstrate ability or fooling the system to move ahead or virtue signal ?) and the inconsequential nature of the test once there are "cracks" available. In our country, we have very competitive examinations conducted every year, and people have cracked it with high national level ranks without much understanding of the subject - thanks to tutoring institutes that spawned as a sub field to coach these people. I have also known a couple of people who aren't that smart ( when you talk to them in person ) but who wear badges of honor about their SAT scores etc.
pmiller2 8y ago
The big difference is you pass the MCAT or bar exam once, then never worry about it again.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- jorblumesea 8y ago
  That's not true, not every state shares or accepts Bar results from other states, and Doctors have medical board exams that also need to be studied for. If you are a lawyer or a doctor and are moving to a new state, you probably need to study.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - pmiller2 8y ago
    If you're a practicing physician and move to another state, you, in fact, probably do not have to retake licensure exams. Almost all states either have reciprocity agreements with at least a few other states, or will grant a license by endorsement to a physician who's licensed in another state and has practiced for a certain number of years. See http://www.visalaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/physicianchart.pdf http://www.visalaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/physicianc... Board exams are the same as MCATs in the sense that you take them once and forget about it. For lawyers, the situation isn't so rosy (which is to be expected, because law varies a lot per state), but there is quite a lot of reciprocity out there, and some states will offer an "attorney's exam" in lieu of a full bar exam. And, for some areas of law that are strictly federal, admission to the federal bar can be sufficient to practice in any state. It is not as hard as you make it out to be.