|
|
|
|
|
|
by edmundhuber
3047 days ago
|
|
|
Companies employing the strategy of "everyone has to take the test" are missing out on great candidates. The best employees respect their own time enough to not spend time on an exam/busywork. The best employees often also have copious Github repos that you could read up on, or quiz them about. But maybe the "take home test" strategy is about identifying candidates that will sacrifice their free time for your company. No matter how you look at it, it doesn't look good. |
|
|
Just relying on code on Github is okay -- until you realize some people don't like to work on non-proprietary code in their free time, preferring to spend it with family.
Just relying on deep questioning is okay -- until you realize some people are excellent at learning and communicating complex topics but haven't actually implemented it yet.
Just relying on live coding is okay -- until you realize some people have bad anxiety and can't perform in that sort of environment.
Just relying on take home tests is okay -- until you realize people don't like working for free on the off chance you'll hire them.
While I don't like some processes more than others, I've also never been truly satisfied with any hiring process I've put together (and we've tried all types) -- perhaps because hiring is a fundamentally flawed process. Perhaps the best advice is: don't work for a company that interviews in a way you don't like, and don't hire people who don't like the way you interview. The best we can do at that point is be transparent up front.