3 ms·
The problem is when the tests let in "too many people" for big companies, they end up ramping them up to be unnecessarily hard to compensate. Then small compani
by fnimick 3y ago
The problem is when the tests let in "too many people" for big companies, they end up ramping them up to be unnecessarily hard to compensate. Then small companies feel that they need to copy what successful big cos do, so they end up with insane leetcode problems and then complain that they can't get any good candidates because they're all failing at the arbitrary barrier specifically designed to cut out 99% of the applicant pool.
When I hear "technical test", I don't think "reasonable implementation", I think of the interview I was in where I was asked a moderately difficult graph question, I reasoned my way to the solution from scratch, then got cut from the process with the explicit feedback that I should have recognized Djikstra's algorithm and had it memorized rather than needing to derive the correct solution myself (!!!)
(that still blows my mind, apparently being able to understand the problem and derive the correct solution is worse than memorizing it)
- sfn42 3y agoYeah, that's idiotic.
- kcplate 3y ago> I reasoned my way to the solution from scratch, then got cut from the process with the explicit feedback that I should have recognized Djikstra's algorithm and had it memorized rather than needing to derive the correct solution myself Your mistake was that you thought they wanted someone with creative problem solving skills…when what they really wanted was a parrot.
- cratermoon 3y agoYea, I've "failed" technical interviews because my solution was not the one the interviewer was looking for. Sometimes I wonder if the interviewers lack the skill to evaluate a solution on its own merits, and are just pattern matching with the solution they want. It's not a class exam, I'm not required to demonstrate I learned the material and can regurgitate it, I'm (supposedly) being hired for my ability to solve problems.