Here's the thing about take-home tests. Let's say I put 5 hours into it. That's all right, if I get the job. But let's say I don't. I don't get the next one

Here's the thing about take-home tests. Let's say I put 5 hours into it. That's all right, if I get the job. But let's say I don't. I don't get the next one, either. Let's say it takes me 20 tries to land a job. Well, that's 100 hours just on take-home exams. That's 2.5 full-time weeks on take-home exams. So, no. It's a nightmare, and it's one I won't subject myself to. I mean, for one job, I might if I really wanted that particular job. In general, though, no. Just no. See, with an interview, if you waste my time, you also waste your own - you have skin in the game too. But if you give me a take-home exam, and I spend 5 hours on it, and you never look at it, it costs you zero. Or you give it to 30 people and spend two minutes looking at each persons' results. You can waste my time without wasting your own. And I have a strong suspicion that interviewers do in fact waste applicants' time with take-homes. They don't bother to be efficient with the interviewers' time.