[privacypoller]

All of these interviewing "tools" (or tricks) attempt to be time/cost efficient proxies for doing the damn job, and they all suck.

* Whiteboard coding is awesome for software development shops that don't actually own computers or use punch cards to load programs.

* Shared coding environments with a time limit works well when you want to double screen for someone who can also diffuse suspicious packages that arrive at the office

* Riddles and puzzles are good when your workplace has a chicken coop, an office fox and you can't figure out how everyone can go for lunch without leaving the fox alone.

* Behavioral interviews are appreciated by candidates who took Psychology 100 back in school for an easy A.

* Take-home tests go over well with the huge population of talented software developers who can't find a job and have loads of time they want to spend decoding the operational cost of a bubble sort

The only thing I've seen that's at all realistic and effective is a very short, __paid__ project. I did a two-day one for Indeed (ironically one of the worst promoters of all this bullshit) and a 4-hour one for my current employer. The payment doesn't even have to be market, it's more important as a signal to candidates that the company values your time.

I ask for 3 things from perspective employers:

1. value my time like you value your own (both the number and composition of your interview steps)

2. keep me updated as to where we're at in the process and when the next stage/decision will be made

3. Move forward in the process in a timely manner. It should not take more than 2 weeks from when you initially contact me to the process concludes.

I've never gotten more than two of the above from a single organization, but I will someday, and I'm betting that a company that treats potential employees that well will treat actual employees better as well.

[vultour]

Riddles are the worst, I was recently asked the "You have a 5 litre and a 3 litre container, how do you get 4 litres" question (never heard it before).

It's so simple to figure out if you're on your own and just play around with the idea. When asked on the spot I just kept thinking "hey these people want an answer NOW, don't make them wait" while feeling their stare, and couldn't figure it out without help.

[tluyben2]

I guess if you are old enough you'll know that one from the movie. Doesn't mean you remember how they solved it (because what did I care at the time?). Nothing to do with programming unless someone asks you to write a short program to figure out the most efficient (least steps) on how to do it. Behind a computer.

[batteryhorse]

Yup. Bruce Willis and Samuel Jackson were able to figure that one out. It can't be that hard. They were under a lot of pressure as well.

[SomewhatLikely]

I have found the best course is to treat the interview as a situation where a colleague has come to me with a problem that we are hashing out together. I feel a lot less pressure with that mindset, though I do get thrown off by interviewers who take an adversarial approach. But I find this an acceptable loss.

[benmowa]

{

t0:{[3,5],[0,0]},

t1:{[3,5],[0,5]},

t2:{[3,5],[3,2]},

t3:{[3,5],[0,2]},

t4:{[3,5],[2,0]},

t5:{[3,5],[2,5]},

t6:{[3,5],[3,4]},

}

Thinking about making this an algorithm, are we forced to use recursion?

[loxias]

I agree with much of what you say, heck, nearly all of it -- but it's not reasonable to expect, or even ask for a _very_ short paid project. I see no reason that a possible employer should pay actual money for some useless task.

If it's very short, then almost by definition it's useless.

That being said I've had great results from doing, say, a tiny consulting project, and ending up with full time employment. The best jobs of my life have followed the pattern of "am either offered, or I manage to ask/negotiate for a small consulting project" -> "before the project actually ends, am brought on full time".

[davidw]

> I see no reason that a possible employer should pay actual money for some useless task.

My time is valuable. I see no reason to work on a useless task for free.

[jayd16]

So is their time. Takes candidate time to do, takes employer time to test/evaluate. Both parties are risking wasted time. You're wasting time driving to interviews and answering calls etc etc. Its the cost of doing business.

[davidw]

Asking someone to spend an hour on something is not a big deal, but I've seen/heard of stuff where they're talking about half a day or even an entire day. For someone with other things going on like a family (I know it may seem outlandish to younger readers here, but it does happen) and a current job, that's asking an awful lot. It does not take the company an entire day to review that exercise, making the time commitment very asymmetric.

[czinck]

How did you follow "take-home tests suck" with "two day paid projects are great"? Sure you're at least compensated for your time but most employment agreements almost certainly block this (unless you're a contractor), and that's assuming I'm willing to use 2 vacation days to maybe get an offer.

[mavelikara]

Following your style of writing:

* Paid projects are appreciated by candidates who are currently unemployed.

[woolvalley]

The issue with a paid project is you can't legally do it with people on work visas, which is a large part of your interview pool.

They are all imperfect proxies due to various constraints.

[rightbyte]

What? Just let the programmer to it in his homeland. Easy. Just as outsourcing.

I wish this project approuch was more common. It would probably be cheaper than wasting time on multiple days interviewing reality shows where people are voted out one by one like some companies do it.

[woolvalley]

It doesn't work when they are already working in the foreign country. They aren't going to travel 12 hours to do a homework assignment for you legally.