3 ms·
It's a little hard to believe only 5/80 devs could talk through a solution. It's possible your standard was to high for what was "correct". I love no-code probl
by giantg2 2y ago
It's a little hard to believe only 5/80 devs could talk through a solution. It's possible your standard was to high for what was "correct". I love no-code problems since if find the problem and solution more interesting without the distraction of working in some different coding environment (seems like they're always different in interviews).
It's also surprising that only 4/80 had a website to show you. I would expect that most web devs have a personal site or Github to show you. I did that prior to my last internal team move going from mostly backend work to mostly front-end work. It seemed to make a good impression for the manager that I had a working site with a variety of components and some customized CSS. It's also a real site for advertising my honey and other apiary products. I also wonder if the sites you mentioned were really identical, or if the framework and css templates just made them look similar? It's really easy to see a material or bootstrap site and say it looks like any other material of bootstrap site.
- muzani 2y agoNah, this is a pretty good rate. Half the applicants can't FizzBuzz on paper to save their lives. If you ask them to actually write code, it would be closer to 1/80. Which is why interviewing sucks so hard... most of the time you're just filtering spam. Either you use a ATS or make them do an insultingly easy coding test before they can talk to anyone. People are happy to lie on their resume and cheat in tests to get their foot in the door, which is why smaller companies tend to do the latter. However, this might also mean that OP is using a bad pipeline, probably craigslist or something similarly cheap/free where good devs don't hang around.
- giantg2 2y agoIf the rates are really that low, why don't I get offers? Basic fizzbuzz easy.