I just glanced quickly over the failure reason let's say, and all I can say is that I am 100% sympathetic and solidary with you. Interviews are really horrible and measuring the potential job performance or position fit with a shady sort algorithm that is almost never used in practice is borderline disgusting... It's a true shame that industry can't do better than this overall :(
I wish you all the best in the future and that you're happy and feeling accomplished at your current job.
I think the thing is: large companies need "solid" processes. They need some sort of script to tell them: "do that if you want to find a good candidate". But doing that they exclude a lot of good people.
Maybe someone isn't that sharp solving algorithms but he/she is amazing in breaking big product requirement into smaller tasks.
There are tons of possibilities and those processes does not consider them.
Indeed, and seems like in code, the industry only cares about minimizing the false negatives, and it doesn't care about false positives: a developer can be amazing solving algorithmic questions, but, really a lousy team player or unable to work under pressure, etc.
My main pain point (and it hits close to home because well I also suck at algorithmic interviews under time pressure) is that some of the algorithms that are required, are actually very far away from the real work, or, as in your case, even if there is indeed a useful use case, it's usually pair-programmed or researched carefully over 2/3h or something.
And I'm 100% sure you would nail it while on the job. And you didn't get the chance because of almost some "gatekeeping" algorithmic questions, that honestly, just tend to get more and more disconnected from real workflows, especially with microservices, docker, CI/CD on the rise, the spectrum of tasks and scope of the day to day work becomes more intense in a very different direction. It just baffles me that we all as an industry can still NOT SEE this, in 2020.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I just glanced quickly over the failure reason let's say, and all I can say is that I am 100% sympathetic and solidary with you. Interviews are really horrible and measuring the potential job performance or position fit with a shady sort algorithm that is almost never used in practice is borderline disgusting... It's a true shame that industry can't do better than this overall :(
I wish you all the best in the future and that you're happy and feeling accomplished at your current job.
Thanks for the comment, Bruno.
I think the thing is: large companies need "solid" processes. They need some sort of script to tell them: "do that if you want to find a good candidate". But doing that they exclude a lot of good people.
Maybe someone isn't that sharp solving algorithms but he/she is amazing in breaking big product requirement into smaller tasks.
There are tons of possibilities and those processes does not consider them.
Indeed, and seems like in code, the industry only cares about minimizing the false negatives, and it doesn't care about false positives: a developer can be amazing solving algorithmic questions, but, really a lousy team player or unable to work under pressure, etc.
My main pain point (and it hits close to home because well I also suck at algorithmic interviews under time pressure) is that some of the algorithms that are required, are actually very far away from the real work, or, as in your case, even if there is indeed a useful use case, it's usually pair-programmed or researched carefully over 2/3h or something.
And I'm 100% sure you would nail it while on the job. And you didn't get the chance because of almost some "gatekeeping" algorithmic questions, that honestly, just tend to get more and more disconnected from real workflows, especially with microservices, docker, CI/CD on the rise, the spectrum of tasks and scope of the day to day work becomes more intense in a very different direction. It just baffles me that we all as an industry can still NOT SEE this, in 2020.