4 ms·

A coding exercise should, ideally, be a starting point for a follow up discussion. Then discuss things you would do next given unlimited time etc and justify t

A coding exercise should, ideally, be a starting point for a follow up discussion. Then discuss things you would do next given unlimited time etc and justify those points. That's plenty insightful into what a developer prioritises and how they approach software development. Expecting a perfect solution isn't reasonable.

ritchiea 7y ago
That sounds ideal but oftentimes, intentionally or not, that isn't the expectation communicated. And in some cases I have seen take home coding exercises that are literally projects big enough for weeks of work. That particular small startup had copied their take home exam from a bigger company. They told me "work as far as I can," but it is intimidating and accomplishing a reasonable amount in say half a day still would feel like I had barely scratched the surface of the work they "suggested" I do "as much of as I feel like." It made me feel like an inadequate candidate by feeling like I can't possibly put enough of a dent in that task for it to be meaningful. Oh and by the way the people asking me for that work were significantly more junior than me. I politely passed on the company and even beginning the take home test. I have also had a company give me an API to build with sparse instructions. I did my best, I probably should have asked them more questions. I got no response. I followed up weeks later to see if there was more I could do with the coding exam or if I misunderstood it somehow. They didn't have anything else to say about the coding exam but they did invite me in for an in person interview. They then ghosted me and my further follow ups about the status of the hiring process. The thing about the hiring issues in the industry is they aren't as simple as the solution you offered up. They are systemic and it doesn't feel like anyone is even trying to improve them. And that the changes that do happen are equally but differently absurd in their expectations as the mistakes of the past.
ghaff 7y ago
Unless the problem is relatively trivial, it's pretty easy to see job candidates not wanting to turn in a quick hack job. But, if this test is early in the interview process--and it probably is--expecting a day of work (plus all the other prep/time) for a given interview is probably not reasonable. Which is a general problem. Assuming a couple of days to interview with a company might not be totally unreasonable in isolation. It starts to become so if someone with a job is interviewing multiple companies. That said, there are certainly jobs where some sort of "audition" is clearly reasonable and even necessary. The arts are obvious. But I've held a number of positions where writing (and analysis, presentations, etc.) for external audiences was a big part of my job. You can be sure I want to see a writing sample and maybe even a presentation from a candidate for a similar role. If they already have some writing samples, that may be OK. But, if they don't, they're going to have to create one.

ritchiea 7y ago

That sounds ideal but oftentimes, intentionally or not, that isn't the expectation communicated. And in some cases I have seen take home coding exercises that are literally projects big enough for weeks of work. That particular small startup had copied their take home exam from a bigger company. They told me "work as far as I can," but it is intimidating and accomplishing a reasonable amount in say half a day still would feel like I had barely scratched the surface of the work they "suggested" I do "as much of as I feel like." It made me feel like an inadequate candidate by feeling like I can't possibly put enough of a dent in that task for it to be meaningful. Oh and by the way the people asking me for that work were significantly more junior than me. I politely passed on the company and even beginning the take home test. I have also had a company give me an API to build with sparse instructions. I did my best, I probably should have asked them more questions. I got no response. I followed up weeks later to see if there was more I could do with the coding exam or if I misunderstood it somehow. They didn't have anything else to say about the coding exam but they did invite me in for an in person interview. They then ghosted me and my further follow ups about the status of the hiring process. The thing about the hiring issues in the industry is they aren't as simple as the solution you offered up. They are systemic and it doesn't feel like anyone is even trying to improve them. And that the changes that do happen are equally but differently absurd in their expectations as the mistakes of the past.

ghaff 7y ago

Unless the problem is relatively trivial, it's pretty easy to see job candidates not wanting to turn in a quick hack job. But, if this test is early in the interview process--and it probably is--expecting a day of work (plus all the other prep/time) for a given interview is probably not reasonable. Which is a general problem. Assuming a couple of days to interview with a company might not be totally unreasonable in isolation. It starts to become so if someone with a job is interviewing multiple companies. That said, there are certainly jobs where some sort of "audition" is clearly reasonable and even necessary. The arts are obvious. But I've held a number of positions where writing (and analysis, presentations, etc.) for external audiences was a big part of my job. You can be sure I want to see a writing sample and maybe even a presentation from a candidate for a similar role. If they already have some writing samples, that may be OK. But, if they don't, they're going to have to create one.