One of the things these discussions rarely bring up is that companies want to have a similar process for evaluating everyone. This is especially important if a

One of the things these discussions rarely bring up is that companies want to have a similar process for evaluating everyone. This is especially important if a rejected candidate accuses the company of illegal discrimination. If you can show that you applied the same criteria to everyone, then you have a better defense. I think side projects are great, and can be useful in evaluating how well a candidate will "fit" a job or work environment, but there's no denying that it's a deviation from a standard evaluation process. At one place I worked, one of the exercises we used simulated working in a team environment. HR was really worried that we were giving a "test" (this really sets of their alarm bells if they haven't vetted it!) and we had to prove up and down that it was an exercise to see how they performed in a group setting, and the actual code wasn't very important. The whiteboard coding interviews are beyond stupid IMO, but at least they can prove that they're consistently applied.