[ubershmekel]

> This person is so convinced that they are a good developer that they refuse to take direction or ask questions

While I agree a coding exercise is valuable - this is the actual problem. The way I test for that humility is by asking "tell me about a time you personally did a poor job." I then follow up by asking for a time they identified a failure of a colleague. I look to see if they're empathetical, open to being wrong, and declaring they're always trying to improve.

[neilv]

A difficulty with this kind of question is that the how-to-beat-the-coding-interview books and sites, which many students and professionals read, already prep them for how to answer.

People get step-by-step strategy for this kind of question, what the interviewer is looking for, and what notes to hit. And sometimes prep them for the exact question, so that they can have a prefab answer ready.

Then we might be selecting for more like what used to be MBA students, or at least people who know how to play along, and say the right corporate going-through-the-motions things.

Some organizations will want to select for test-prep specifically, as a good predictor for the kind of employee they want, but I like to think there's other organizations that decidedly don't want that.

[pmikesell]

I don’t think this is a great approach. You’re selecting for good talkers. There are many great engineers and coworkers who don’t do well on these types of verbal psychological games.

Folks are given all sorts of interview advice about leading to claim things like “my greatest weakness is that I work too hard”.

[AgentME]

One way to test for humility is have them do a programming challenge that isn't too difficult (it's not about whether they remember the algorithm for merge sorts), but has a few common pitfalls and arbitrary choices, and see how they react when you ask questions about their choices or make suggestions to them. Can they explain a choice? Can they follow a suggestion (or correctly and politely argue that it's unnecessary)?