5 ms·

Developers hate them because coding tests have devolved into multi-hour, unpaid assignments from which no feedback is given. It's especially bad if they are unw

Developers hate them because coding tests have devolved into multi-hour, unpaid assignments from which no feedback is given. It's especially bad if they are unwilling (as some seem to be) to have a short phone conversation prior to the coding test to tell you about the project.

yibg 7y ago
Coding test without a chat first is super annoying and something I flat out refuse. If you can't be bothered to invest 30 minutes, don't expect me to put in n hours.
- IloveHN84 7y ago
  Amazon runs codility tests prior to a phone chat.
  - asp_hornet 7y ago
    Even better, Amazon annoys you on LinkedIn to do a coding test to see if you are worthy to start the interview process. I never applied or have interest in working with Amazon but i still get harassed every month to do a coding test.
  - newshorts 7y ago
    I guess I’ll never work at Amazon...
    - IloveHN84 7y ago
      Maybe just for big money
  - bsdpython 7y ago
    Amazon also refuses to give feedback and then spam mails you to provide them feedback on the interview process. That tells you a lot about how they are as a company.
onion2k 7y ago
I don't know about the US but here in the UK paying someone for a coding test is actually not as simple as it sounds. If you employ someone, even just for a half day test, you have to do a "Right to work" assessment (https://www.gov.uk/check-job-applicant-right-to-work https://www.gov.uk/check-job-applicant-right-to-work) which can take up a lot of time. It's a pain in the *&^%. At my company we give candidates something to cover any expenses they've had to pay to attend an interview and take them out to lunch somewhere nice afterwards. It'd be nice to do more, but companies can't because the government has decided stopping employing immigrants is more important than doing what's right for candidates.
- roel_v 7y ago
  You just pay them a flat-rate expense reimbursement. Tadaa, problem fixed! I hate companies cowaring behind rigid interpretations of rules to get out of paying people.
  - fhars 7y ago
    But there is tax limit on flat reimbursements that is considerably lower than the actual cost in almost all cases (think €20 for a night in a hotel). Following your advice is actually a criminal offence (tax evasion).
    - roel_v 7y ago
      If your accountant cannot tell you how to do this, you need to fire him/her and get a competent one. Hiding behind 'tax evasion' so that you can get away with paying people in 'nice lunches' (lol) is ridiculous.
      - eitland 7y ago
        For the context: are you UK based?
      - onion2k 7y ago
        Hiding behind 'tax evasion' so that you can get away with paying people in 'nice lunches' (lol) is ridiculous. No one is hiding behind anything. The fact is that to pay someone properly for a half day test is not straightforward here in the UK (assuming you want to do it legally; obviously you could just give them cash). I've actually spent time looking in to it.
freddie_mercury 7y ago
> It's especially bad if they are unwilling (as some seem to be) to have a short phone conversation prior to the coding test to tell you about the project. I'm sympathetic. But the last time I put out a job ad I got over 100 applications for a single opening. How should companies try to narrow that to a manageable number? Just look at the CV and throw it out based on that? What do you look for on the CV that cuts out 80%+ on candidates to get the number down to an amount that I could have a short phone conversation with?
- roel_v 7y ago
  You didn't invite all of them for am interview did you? Just call those you will interview. And yes you preselect on the CV, that's what it's for.
- rleigh 7y ago
  Yes, that's the exact reason you got those CVs in the first place. To assess their suitability. To require every applicant to waste their time to do some test to save you reading them is phenomenally lazy. Do that after you've done an initial pass over the CVs, and had a conversation with them. Your job opening should have had some sort of "job specification" with "essential" and "desirable" criteria. Take a quick pass over all the CVs. If they don't meet all essential criteria, then put them in a reject pile. For the remaining CVs, order them by how many of the desirable criteria they meet, then take a cut of the top n to contact. If you don't have the time to do this, then HR should. This won't take long; it's a quick yes/no. You look at the remaining CVs in detail after that initial pass and take into account their education, experience etc. Any candidate worth their salt will already have tailored their CV for the job specification to make sure that the essential and desirable criteria are clearly shown on the CV to make your job easier. If it's not clear, then reject it. You'll have that number down to a shortlist of 5 in 60 minutes.
- inimino 7y ago
  Yes, you call the ones that look best on paper first, and you keep interviewing until you hire someone. You don't throw out the CVs at all because you might look at them later. Give up on this absurd idea that you need a perfect process to find the perfect person without doing any of the work. There's not a talent shortage in our industry nearly so much as there is a sane-hiring-practice shortage. Maybe we should start quizzing would-be managers on these basic hiring skills before putting them in positions where they are responsible for hiring people.

yibg 7y ago

Coding test without a chat first is super annoying and something I flat out refuse. If you can't be bothered to invest 30 minutes, don't expect me to put in n hours.

IloveHN84 7y ago
Amazon runs codility tests prior to a phone chat.
- asp_hornet 7y ago
  Even better, Amazon annoys you on LinkedIn to do a coding test to see if you are worthy to start the interview process. I never applied or have interest in working with Amazon but i still get harassed every month to do a coding test.
- newshorts 7y ago
  I guess I’ll never work at Amazon...
  - IloveHN84 7y ago
    Maybe just for big money
- bsdpython 7y ago
  Amazon also refuses to give feedback and then spam mails you to provide them feedback on the interview process. That tells you a lot about how they are as a company.

onion2k 7y ago

I don't know about the US but here in the UK paying someone for a coding test is actually not as simple as it sounds. If you employ someone, even just for a half day test, you have to do a "Right to work" assessment (https://www.gov.uk/check-job-applicant-right-to-work https://www.gov.uk/check-job-applicant-right-to-work) which can take up a lot of time. It's a pain in the *&^%. At my company we give candidates something to cover any expenses they've had to pay to attend an interview and take them out to lunch somewhere nice afterwards. It'd be nice to do more, but companies can't because the government has decided stopping employing immigrants is more important than doing what's right for candidates.

roel_v 7y ago
You just pay them a flat-rate expense reimbursement. Tadaa, problem fixed! I hate companies cowaring behind rigid interpretations of rules to get out of paying people.
- fhars 7y ago
  But there is tax limit on flat reimbursements that is considerably lower than the actual cost in almost all cases (think €20 for a night in a hotel). Following your advice is actually a criminal offence (tax evasion).
  - roel_v 7y ago
    If your accountant cannot tell you how to do this, you need to fire him/her and get a competent one. Hiding behind 'tax evasion' so that you can get away with paying people in 'nice lunches' (lol) is ridiculous.
    - eitland 7y ago
      For the context: are you UK based?
    - onion2k 7y ago
      Hiding behind 'tax evasion' so that you can get away with paying people in 'nice lunches' (lol) is ridiculous. No one is hiding behind anything. The fact is that to pay someone properly for a half day test is not straightforward here in the UK (assuming you want to do it legally; obviously you could just give them cash). I've actually spent time looking in to it.

freddie_mercury 7y ago

> It's especially bad if they are unwilling (as some seem to be) to have a short phone conversation prior to the coding test to tell you about the project. I'm sympathetic. But the last time I put out a job ad I got over 100 applications for a single opening. How should companies try to narrow that to a manageable number? Just look at the CV and throw it out based on that? What do you look for on the CV that cuts out 80%+ on candidates to get the number down to an amount that I could have a short phone conversation with?

roel_v 7y ago
You didn't invite all of them for am interview did you? Just call those you will interview. And yes you preselect on the CV, that's what it's for.
rleigh 7y ago
Yes, that's the exact reason you got those CVs in the first place. To assess their suitability. To require every applicant to waste their time to do some test to save you reading them is phenomenally lazy. Do that after you've done an initial pass over the CVs, and had a conversation with them. Your job opening should have had some sort of "job specification" with "essential" and "desirable" criteria. Take a quick pass over all the CVs. If they don't meet all essential criteria, then put them in a reject pile. For the remaining CVs, order them by how many of the desirable criteria they meet, then take a cut of the top n to contact. If you don't have the time to do this, then HR should. This won't take long; it's a quick yes/no. You look at the remaining CVs in detail after that initial pass and take into account their education, experience etc. Any candidate worth their salt will already have tailored their CV for the job specification to make sure that the essential and desirable criteria are clearly shown on the CV to make your job easier. If it's not clear, then reject it. You'll have that number down to a shortlist of 5 in 60 minutes.
inimino 7y ago
Yes, you call the ones that look best on paper first, and you keep interviewing until you hire someone. You don't throw out the CVs at all because you might look at them later. Give up on this absurd idea that you need a perfect process to find the perfect person without doing any of the work. There's not a talent shortage in our industry nearly so much as there is a sane-hiring-practice shortage. Maybe we should start quizzing would-be managers on these basic hiring skills before putting them in positions where they are responsible for hiring people.