Traditional tech interviews (live coding challenges, algorithms, brain teasers, etc) have so little value and cause so much suffering in candidates, they are bo

Traditional tech interviews (live coding challenges, algorithms, brain teasers, etc) have so little value and cause so much suffering in candidates, they are borderline sadistic IMO and in the end you are just as likely to make a bad hire, then not be organizationally prepared to deal with that so you end up with a broken team and bad outcomes. Why? There are still challenges with contract to hire but overall I've had great success with it. First of all, we get a realistic deep look at candidate capabilities before we commit and they get a look at what it's like to work with us. Then we're very prepared to part ways because that is the entire point of the contract to hire. If feels 10x more successful in hiring great people than any other approach I've personally seen and, very critically, it is more humane and respectful. There is a hypothetical concern that highly pursued candidates won't wait around for that but we've found exactly the opposite is true. The best developers are happy to see we have a more sound hiring process and are psyched because we have a credible case that our teams are really high quality and free from the random bad apple that spoils the work experience at most other companies. Great devs aren't worried about being hired today or in two weeks, they know they can get a job anytime they want. What makes great devs great is usually their passion for great craft, process, culture - if we can credibly promise that, they overwhelmingly are happy to do contract to hire.