3 ms·
It's not that I'm against a "4 hour test" per-se, but it's highly dependent on the context. 1) If that type of test is used early in the flow, then that is hig
by tomhallett 5y ago
It's not that I'm against a "4 hour test" per-se, but it's highly dependent on the context.
1) If that type of test is used early in the flow, then that is highly disrespectful. That type of time commitment should only be used at the end of the hiring funnel when everyone else has already signed off on me, and I have signed off on the company.
2) I need to know that the time commitment is symmetrical. While coding over zoom isn't perfect, at least I know the company has done the analysis to say "this candidate is worth 4 hours of our company's time". Once a hiring manager sets up a 4 hour calendar block on a senior engineer's calendar, you will immediately get pushback of "Is there anyway we can shorten this exercise to 1 hour? 45 minutes?"
- gorpomon 5y ago1) The assignment is mid-flow after we're reasonably sure we'd want to work with said person, and if the assignment results in decline, I give actionable feedback why. 2) The time commitment can often be more on our end, several engineers review it, it's probably equal or more man hours. I think doing a block of fixed time would be more stressful, I've had to do that and it wasn't fun.