|
|
|
|
|
by koala_man
2923 days ago
|
|
>Seeing “how someone thinks” in an artificial 30-60 minute session only tests a completely separate and mostly unnecessary skill set Totally agree. However, what's a good alternative? A company can't hire everyone for a trial week, and a candidate can't work a trial week for every company. It's really hard to design a hiring process that is efficient for both parties plus resistant to abuse. |
|
You are right that interviewers won’t get much more than an hour to judge a candidate. So why waste it on information that fundamentally can’t be helpful (like whiteboard trivia)?
Instead, first jump right into a domain where the candidate should already be comfortable and technical — their past work projects — and go from there, probing for more technical depth.
The idea that it somehow makes more sense to use limited time by wholesale discounting & ignoring the person’s previous work history in favor of having them write a sorting algorithm in CoderPad is totally indefensible.