[philjohn]

This is why it needs to be a challenge related to the employer, but not an actual feature they're going to go and use.

At my last place we used one, said "please don't spend more than 5 hours on it" - it was a challenge to read a specific industry format (e.g. test you can go and find something to read it, not implement a library to do so ... not reinventing the wheel) and present it in a basic RESTful web app (testing that you know what REST is, and can implement basic CRUD).

Never had an issue getting it done, and it was very illuminating, some people who passed through the initial interview with flying colours turned in absolute crap.

[bogomipz]

>"please don't spend more than 5 hours on it"

Stated another we don't want you to give up more than an "entire evening" or your "entire Saturday afternoon." This is messed up.

What's even more messed is that you generally won't be given the opportunity to you discuss your thinking or choices on your project. It's just pass fail.

Did you go over your reviews with the candidates that put in 5 hours who failed? And while a company says things like "don't put in more than X hours", the reality is people will put in much more time than that because they know they being put under a microscope and judged as if its production code.

[philjohn]

We always gave feedback, even to those we didn't invite back.

It's either that, whiteboard interviews, or restrictive probation period if we don't test their coding ... each have their downsides, and it was decided the coding project was the most fair.