5 ms·
One thing I’d add is that live coding exercises can vary widely in quality. > If you solve the problem, you’re scored highly. If you don’t, you’re scored poorl
by otras 7y ago
One thing I’d add is that live coding exercises can vary widely in quality.
> If you solve the problem, you’re scored highly. If you don’t, you’re scored poorly.
In my own opinion, this is a terrible way to look at these problems, though many people do use this metric. This is further emphasized by HackerRank-style exercises where you have to pass all test cases. This is robotic and not empathic at all.
A more fluid and dynamic approach that focuses on the candidate’s approach, ability to clarify, and problem solving, even if the correct answer isn’t reached, can still give valuable signals
Disclaimer: I work and give interviews at a large tech co that uses exercises.
- watwut 7y agoWhat is wrong approach and is good approach? I agree that ability to explain and clarify matter in many positions and are real thing. But I never understood what is meant by "approach".
- jcims 7y agoI wonder if there is any value in having a few candidates do a group project. Would probably be a mess but might be informative, you could at least identify the bullies and dickheads pretty quickly.
- kvonhorn 7y agoI could imagine that this would be the worst way to evaluate candidates I've ever heard, especially if not everyone got hired. I think this would only be an appropriate evaluation metric if your end product were actually a reality TV show focusing on this process. Maybe do it Survivor style, have 12 candidates/new grads start, give them the goal of producing an MVP CRUD app, and start voting people out of the scrum after a couple of days. Winner gets a 6 month contract to hire, 3 people have their careers ruined, and the rest bump around the valley for a few years before moving back to wherever the hell they came from. The memes that come out of this alone could make this show a valuable cultural contribution.
- dredmorbius 7y agoThere's an organisation that operates like this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recruit_training https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recruit_training
- akhilcacharya 7y agoThis is a popular sentiment but it’s still false. A hiring committee isn’t going to pass you if you don’t finish the problem (ideally multiple problems) optimally.
- otras 7y agoFor a counter example, I know that I didn’t finish a problem but did make it through. I’m not sure such blanket statements apply.
- akhilcacharya 7y agoYour experience is highly atypical Without a flawless performance it’s unlikely for most people to get offers.
- mobjack 7y agoIt depends on the committee. I am more looking into how a candidate thinks than if they get the problem correct. It is more telling when someone is able to logically work through a problem they never seen before even if it isn't optimal or even correct. I am more skeptical of those who blow through a hard problem getting the optimal solution right away. It likely means they memorized it or had lots of practice on such type of problems. I don't hold it against them, but often have to throw in some curve ball follow ups to see if they really know there stuff.
- anon44 7y agoIn that vast majority of cases, interviewers are expecting the right solution. When I see a question I know the answer to, I pretend to eventually come to the solution to impress fools such as yourself.
- adamredwoods 7y ago+1. The variation between companies is part of the problem, IMO. When a company gives me a coding test, I don't know what will happen next. I don't know if I devote my time to a coding test if it will result in either a pass/fail examination (meaning instant rejection, no follow up) or a live post-discussion to talk about my mistakes or methods. I'm currently interviewing, and I have to say I've taken enough pass/fail coding tests to start to shy away from coding tests, especially if they don't tell me what to expect.