4 ms·

I have a company that told me their first tech round (before speaking to coworkers, manager, etc) is a recorded programming sandbox problem solving for an hour.

I have a company that told me their first tech round (before speaking to coworkers, manager, etc) is a recorded programming sandbox problem solving for an hour. They give you a MSFT Teams number to call into someone on the team who is on-call while doing work, in case you have any questions re: the test. Otherwise they stressed it is “not interactive”. They then look at your results / watch the recording and let you know if they want to talk. A bit over the top for an experienced hire interview loop.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
At least it's only one hour and not a "3 hour take home tests with REST APIs, microservices, containers, NoSQL database, documentation and unit tests", that actually takes a full weekend to a whole week to complete to spec.
- steveBK123 4y ago
  Agreed, I’ve also done the take-home multi-hour, take a weekend ones. Worse from a time consumption perspective. However - Something about the panopticon recorded timed test thing feels a little big brother to me.
mekoka 4y ago
Devil's advocate here. That's the kind of interview problem solving test I prefer. You're given an hour to solve a problem that probably takes less than half that time (if we go by the typical problem given for tech interviews). The ticking time stress effect is thus somewhat alleviated and you can focus more on the problem. You're left solving the problem on your own. The alternative is a distracting onlooker who keeps bugging you with "what are you thinking?" As if probing people for meta explanations of their mental processes is how we help them solve problems. You're given a phone number to call if you need help. If my assumptions are correct, their approach is not too far off the mark.
- steveBK123 4y ago
  I guess I’ll just add that - as a candidate, for a somewhat niche experienced role, it is incredibly off-putting. They absolutely do not get a lot of applicants for this role. I don’t even have a job spec & having not spoken to anyone technical, I really don’t know the day to day & responsibilities of the potential job. Which is to say, I don’t know that I even want it. I will probably not bother to continue with them as there were some other red flags that point to them being very lean & stingy, which is their reputation on the street.
Cthulhu_ 4y ago
It sounds like that company gets a lot of applicants, enough that they need a quick and minimum-person-hour way to filter out the chaff. I mean I'm all for having people do a technical test; at my previous company it was one that would take about eight hours in total, testing people for application design, back- and front-end, XML, JSON, REST, maths, logic, etc. It was a consultancy that "only hired the best", because of course. The technical interview was the 3rd stage though, before that there would have been a CV scan, an introduction, and an hourlong meeting. After the take-home assignment there would be a one hour chat with developers about the assignment, then a short / casual chat with the CEO because he wanted to do final grilling of everyone.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

At least it's only one hour and not a "3 hour take home tests with REST APIs, microservices, containers, NoSQL database, documentation and unit tests", that actually takes a full weekend to a whole week to complete to spec.

steveBK123 4y ago
Agreed, I’ve also done the take-home multi-hour, take a weekend ones. Worse from a time consumption perspective. However - Something about the panopticon recorded timed test thing feels a little big brother to me.

mekoka 4y ago

Devil's advocate here. That's the kind of interview problem solving test I prefer. You're given an hour to solve a problem that probably takes less than half that time (if we go by the typical problem given for tech interviews). The ticking time stress effect is thus somewhat alleviated and you can focus more on the problem. You're left solving the problem on your own. The alternative is a distracting onlooker who keeps bugging you with "what are you thinking?" As if probing people for meta explanations of their mental processes is how we help them solve problems. You're given a phone number to call if you need help. If my assumptions are correct, their approach is not too far off the mark.

steveBK123 4y ago
I guess I’ll just add that - as a candidate, for a somewhat niche experienced role, it is incredibly off-putting. They absolutely do not get a lot of applicants for this role. I don’t even have a job spec & having not spoken to anyone technical, I really don’t know the day to day & responsibilities of the potential job. Which is to say, I don’t know that I even want it. I will probably not bother to continue with them as there were some other red flags that point to them being very lean & stingy, which is their reputation on the street.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago

It sounds like that company gets a lot of applicants, enough that they need a quick and minimum-person-hour way to filter out the chaff. I mean I'm all for having people do a technical test; at my previous company it was one that would take about eight hours in total, testing people for application design, back- and front-end, XML, JSON, REST, maths, logic, etc. It was a consultancy that "only hired the best", because of course. The technical interview was the 3rd stage though, before that there would have been a CV scan, an introduction, and an hourlong meeting. After the take-home assignment there would be a one hour chat with developers about the assignment, then a short / casual chat with the CEO because he wanted to do final grilling of everyone.