4 ms·

10 years ago it was usually 1 hour discussion with a hiring manager and the team. Worst case a FizBaz question. Now it's 5-6 interviews that involve leetcode or

10 years ago it was usually 1 hour discussion with a hiring manager and the team. Worst case a FizBaz question. Now it's 5-6 interviews that involve leetcode or fairly long/complicated programming tasks (and sometimes take home test). I think it's just ageism, we have too many developers with family obligations and they are pushed out of the market because they can't spend doing 6 hours of leetcode preparations after 9 hours of day job.

baggachipz 3y ago
I think it's unintentional ageism, but that's definitely what it becomes. The fear is that people had gotten pretty good at one-hour discussions and FizzBuzz that a lot of inexperience was getting through the funnel. But the current state of things is absurd; grinding leetcode at 45 for an engineering manager position had me questioning my life choices.
jameshart 3y ago
That’s not historically true. Last time I was heavily interviewing was around nine years ago in the Boston area, for principal-level engineering roles. Standard procedure then after passing a technical phone screen was three or four hours of onsite interviews with various peers/managers - usually two whiteboard coding exercises, one system design, one to talk about my background and past work. That was common across public companies, pre-IPO startups, and even small consulting shops. I don’t think it was a new practice at the time.
MichaelZuo 3y ago
> 6 hours of leetcode preparations Anyone who needs that much 'preparation' is likely not a target candidate for the job. It is either unintentionally/intentionally designed to be left unfilled or only meant for recruiting literal geniuses.
- myth_drannon 3y ago
  If it's being awhile since graduation that is about an average time people spend on leetcode from me talking and reading about it. But again some people spend 10 hours for a month and some 2 hours per day for two years.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Non-target candidates can still get recruited via chance and happenstance but that doesn't negate the principle, it's not meant for cramming. It's like cramming for an IQ test.

baggachipz 3y ago

I think it's unintentional ageism, but that's definitely what it becomes. The fear is that people had gotten pretty good at one-hour discussions and FizzBuzz that a lot of inexperience was getting through the funnel. But the current state of things is absurd; grinding leetcode at 45 for an engineering manager position had me questioning my life choices.

jameshart 3y ago

That’s not historically true. Last time I was heavily interviewing was around nine years ago in the Boston area, for principal-level engineering roles. Standard procedure then after passing a technical phone screen was three or four hours of onsite interviews with various peers/managers - usually two whiteboard coding exercises, one system design, one to talk about my background and past work. That was common across public companies, pre-IPO startups, and even small consulting shops. I don’t think it was a new practice at the time.

MichaelZuo 3y ago

> 6 hours of leetcode preparations Anyone who needs that much 'preparation' is likely not a target candidate for the job. It is either unintentionally/intentionally designed to be left unfilled or only meant for recruiting literal geniuses.

myth_drannon 3y ago
If it's being awhile since graduation that is about an average time people spend on leetcode from me talking and reading about it. But again some people spend 10 hours for a month and some 2 hours per day for two years.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Non-target candidates can still get recruited via chance and happenstance but that doesn't negate the principle, it's not meant for cramming. It's like cramming for an IQ test.