Well, would it have been that way back when I started my career as a developer I would not have made it. I would have bombed a 'technical interview' the way it is done today, terribly. But employers used to give people the benefit of a doubt and found ways to find out how someone works by using an esoteric technique called 'talking'.
In my view it should be possible to assess someone by just having a chat (at least as well as with coding interviews - but not as cheap, because someone needs the skills for that - and not just able to solve an already solved problem). Talk about technologies, let nerds be nerds and nerd out together. I get that it might make sense to test juniors with simple exercises because they might not have experience and a track record. But I am in the business for more than 20 years... maybe an employer can put a bit of trust into what I have done and achieved? And in the worst case there is still something like a probation period, right?
When I was looking for a job last time I tracked the amount of time I had to spend in take home assignment, technical interviews and other interviews (while still working as team lead). I spent about 30 hours every week for the companies. Pretty soon I had to cut the companies short when they told me there are more than 3 hoops to be jumped through (god, in one case they wanted me to do 7 interviews AND a take home assignment of between 12 and 24 hours). I signed with a company who did 2 interviews and not one was a coding interview.
Anyways, I just think companies need to understand they will not be able to find and retain the best talents (except of maybe if you are called Google, but maybe not even them) this way... and stop whining about the lack of good candidates when they make everyone jump through the hoops without even trying to convince you why they are a good employer.
Agree, you can get way more information about the candidate just by having a conversation. What have you done, how did you solve that, etc, etc... It makes the recruitment process more expensive, but I bet it pays off in the long term
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.
Agreed with you @syeo66 But what other parameter they have to test a candidates strong hold on logical building and problem solving skills.
Well, would it have been that way back when I started my career as a developer I would not have made it. I would have bombed a 'technical interview' the way it is done today, terribly. But employers used to give people the benefit of a doubt and found ways to find out how someone works by using an esoteric technique called 'talking'.
In my view it should be possible to assess someone by just having a chat (at least as well as with coding interviews - but not as cheap, because someone needs the skills for that - and not just able to solve an already solved problem). Talk about technologies, let nerds be nerds and nerd out together. I get that it might make sense to test juniors with simple exercises because they might not have experience and a track record. But I am in the business for more than 20 years... maybe an employer can put a bit of trust into what I have done and achieved? And in the worst case there is still something like a probation period, right?
When I was looking for a job last time I tracked the amount of time I had to spend in take home assignment, technical interviews and other interviews (while still working as team lead). I spent about 30 hours every week for the companies. Pretty soon I had to cut the companies short when they told me there are more than 3 hoops to be jumped through (god, in one case they wanted me to do 7 interviews AND a take home assignment of between 12 and 24 hours). I signed with a company who did 2 interviews and not one was a coding interview.
Anyways, I just think companies need to understand they will not be able to find and retain the best talents (except of maybe if you are called Google, but maybe not even them) this way... and stop whining about the lack of good candidates when they make everyone jump through the hoops without even trying to convince you why they are a good employer.
Agree, you can get way more information about the candidate just by having a conversation. What have you done, how did you solve that, etc, etc... It makes the recruitment process more expensive, but I bet it pays off in the long term