4 ms·
> That seems very taxing on the company. I'd rather screen the candidate before committing to anything via interview/coding challenge So having a probationary
by shock 6y ago
> That seems very taxing on the company. I'd rather screen the candidate before committing to anything via interview/coding challenge
So having a probationary period is too expensive for the company, but a several hours coding challenge for the developer is a OK?
In my experience when a candidate was a bad fit, it was because of soft skills/personality traits not technical chops (which are much easier to learn than soft skills). Are you screening for soft skills in the coding challenge?
- geofft 6y agoThe developer is eventually joining the company, no? I didn't like spending probably about 5 hours total on coding challenges last time I interviewed, and I've been internally opposing them, but as the candidate who interviewed, I'm much happier having dealt with it once and gotten over it than having probationary employees show up on my team for a week every so often and having to drop what I'm working on to work with them and evaluate them. > In my experience when a candidate was a bad fit, it was because of soft skills/personality traits not technical chops (which are much easier to learn than soft skills). This is a good point, and argues in favor of traditional interviewing (establishing a rapport with the candidate etc.) over any sort of "challenge" IMO. I don't think I'll learn more about soft skills in a week than I would in an hour - the complex stuff generally takes several weeks for the new hire to be properly onboarded and contributing, anyway.