I have a few issues with companies handling interviews like some of these were. So much that I honestly would had told them that I don't see myself as a good fit, thanks for the opportunity, and walked away.
Example: you had 1 hour and 30 minutes to make Trello against 4 people. Unless you are interviewing to be a competitive programmer, that proves nothing. Interviews are already hard enough, turning it into a full on competition is what should not happen.
How does the person making a really good Trello clone in that time limit mean that they a good fit for the company? Did they work well with others? Do you see them working well with the current team members? There are so many questions that a competition does not answer. It is not the type of work that they will be doing for the company. And if making something in 1 hour and 30 minutes is the type of work that is happening at the company, be glad you were rejected.
I'm fine with technical assessments/problems. Though when I interview people I am not looking for the right answer. I'm looking more for how you think. What was the process like for you to solve it? I want the people I interview to work with me to solve it. To talk to me and for us to have a conversation. I learn so much more about how they work from that, than some timed competition that they must do perfectly.
Then I guess I won't work there. There are a ton of very good companies that don't believe in competitive programming as a way to interview.
Just to clarify, I have no problem with technical assessments/challenges as interview questions. My issue is with competitive type programming and judging someone purely based on solving them correctly.
I will work where I am a member of the team. When you are interviewing for a company you should also be interviewing them and have just as many questions for them. See if you find yourself fitting in there. If I don't see that then I won't take the job.
I have personally turned down some interviews to go further because I can tell it's not a place I can see myself happy at.
Chad is not talking about whatever is fair for the company, he's talking about better ways to approach job candidates on which I completely agree.
I can assure you I'm not the best full stack developer, but beyond my decent skills, I would say my personality has opened many doors at workplaces than my skills, to the point that managers don't want to let me go, offer salary increases, and even give me side jobs after leaving the company. All that occurs because I am a team player, provide great customer service, are positive on any situation (issues) 99% of the time, have a sense of humor, doesn't get easily offended, are reliable, etc. Most of those personality traits are difficult to show when asked to code something too difficult.
Some comments have been hidden by the post's author - find out more
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 have a few issues with companies handling interviews like some of these were. So much that I honestly would had told them that I don't see myself as a good fit, thanks for the opportunity, and walked away.
Example: you had 1 hour and 30 minutes to make Trello against 4 people. Unless you are interviewing to be a competitive programmer, that proves nothing. Interviews are already hard enough, turning it into a full on competition is what should not happen.
How does the person making a really good Trello clone in that time limit mean that they a good fit for the company? Did they work well with others? Do you see them working well with the current team members? There are so many questions that a competition does not answer. It is not the type of work that they will be doing for the company. And if making something in 1 hour and 30 minutes is the type of work that is happening at the company, be glad you were rejected.
I'm fine with technical assessments/problems. Though when I interview people I am not looking for the right answer. I'm looking more for how you think. What was the process like for you to solve it? I want the people I interview to work with me to solve it. To talk to me and for us to have a conversation. I learn so much more about how they work from that, than some timed competition that they must do perfectly.
It's up to the employer on what they decide for the interview and how they eant it to be done, and if you want the job you do what they ask you.
Then I guess I won't work there. There are a ton of very good companies that don't believe in competitive programming as a way to interview.
Just to clarify, I have no problem with technical assessments/challenges as interview questions. My issue is with competitive type programming and judging someone purely based on solving them correctly.
I will work where I am a member of the team. When you are interviewing for a company you should also be interviewing them and have just as many questions for them. See if you find yourself fitting in there. If I don't see that then I won't take the job.
I have personally turned down some interviews to go further because I can tell it's not a place I can see myself happy at.
I understand and I just think it's fair for the company to have the interview their way, it's up to us at the end.
Chad is not talking about whatever is fair for the company, he's talking about better ways to approach job candidates on which I completely agree.
I can assure you I'm not the best full stack developer, but beyond my decent skills, I would say my personality has opened many doors at workplaces than my skills, to the point that managers don't want to let me go, offer salary increases, and even give me side jobs after leaving the company. All that occurs because I am a team player, provide great customer service, are positive on any situation (issues) 99% of the time, have a sense of humor, doesn't get easily offended, are reliable, etc. Most of those personality traits are difficult to show when asked to code something too difficult.