3 ms·

> If you’re good at passing ‘standard’ interview processes then it’s probably fine to skip this one and maybe you’d wish they’d go for the same process as every

> If you’re good at passing ‘standard’ interview processes then it’s probably fine to skip this one and maybe you’d wish they’d go for the same process as everyone else. If you suck at the standard ‘algorithms’ questions, maybe you’d be thankful that something else exists This is a good point I didn't consider. (I made two other posts in this thread criticizing the process) If someone is going to spend hours revising for another kind of in-person interview due to their discomfort with the prospect, and would rather invest the same time in providing written answers, they may view this as a better alternative, and that's fair. I don't know enough about the overall process to understand if putting good work into the written part gives them a break on other parts where they may otherwise not perform well. And I still think that making everybody do this is asymmetrical. They could ask everyone to do it and assess them algorithmically for example, wasting huge amounts of peoples time. Maybe if it's given as a choice vs a "get to know you" interview by a recruiter, and it's explained how both are equivalent?

freedomben 5y ago
I agree, I think the idea of a "written" interview is interesting and might be a good idea. The problem I have with this is that there's not enough Canonical skin in the game. They have you do this before they invest any of their time in you. That means that if it takes you 20 hours to respond to all of these in writing, it's nothing from them to trash can your application. They aren't incentivized to make sure they're balancing the value they get with the time it takes to do it. They're basically that person who orders the Lobster and several rounds of imported beer because somebody else is paying the tab. If it was on their dime they'd be a lot more reasonable. At least, at a minimum, do this toward the end. Do the culture fit interview and the aptitude test first so a lot fewer candidates waste their time writing the book you asked for.

freedomben 5y ago

I agree, I think the idea of a "written" interview is interesting and might be a good idea. The problem I have with this is that there's not enough Canonical skin in the game. They have you do this before they invest any of their time in you. That means that if it takes you 20 hours to respond to all of these in writing, it's nothing from them to trash can your application. They aren't incentivized to make sure they're balancing the value they get with the time it takes to do it. They're basically that person who orders the Lobster and several rounds of imported beer because somebody else is paying the tab. If it was on their dime they'd be a lot more reasonable. At least, at a minimum, do this toward the end. Do the culture fit interview and the aptitude test first so a lot fewer candidates waste their time writing the book you asked for.