The biggest problem I have with coding test is not that I would have to do it. But there is no reciprocity.
They won't tell you anything about the job until you take the test.
I take the test pass it and find out that it is 20k below what I am making.
Then they are dumb enough to ask you, "Why do you want to work here?". If that isn't the dumbest question, I dont know what is. You're going through the interview process to decide why you want to work there. But many hirers have this attitude of here's our website, now we want people who are excited to work for us.
I've had more bad experience in doing coding tests, than positive. So I don't waste my time if they aren't willing to reciprocate. If they spend like 20-30 mins answering your questions, about the job, team culture, I have no problem doing the extra work.
Now if I get an email saying they are excited about my resume, but won't spend any time to explain, these things, I just delete it.
Whats worse is for even if you do the coding test, there is no dialogue. Like why did you do this vs doing that. If it doesn't conform to some eggheads way of programming, you don't even get an email back saying someone else was selected.
Agree. But my experience is that people who want you to take coding tests are the equivalent of the robot phone calls. Its so automated there's no personal aspect to the hiring process.
I understand hiring new people is a very difficult and time consuming thing cause you can do coding tests and still get bad hires.
Bottom line though, I want to speak to a real person who can answer questions vs the HR person who doesn't know anything who gives you the coding test and then process you to the next step.
If I'm happy with the interview process and I feel I have a genuine interest in the company and the salary is within my range, I have no problems doing coding tests or coding projects.
I've literally had people tell me that salary, questions will be answered once I satisfy my end with the coding test.
If you have a portfolio that shows your ability to develop stuff that works and a potential employer asks you to take some stupid coding test, I only recommend doing it if you need the money. Then get the fuck out of there as fast as possible after finding an employer who looks at your portfolio and says "this one looks like a good prospect, they make stuff that works."
Those coding tests have about as much to do with being a developer as the FE and PE exams have to do with real engineering.
A portfolio isn't sufficient. I don't have time to figure out if you actually wrote the code in your portfolio. Even if I've narrowed down the applicant pool to five, I'm not going to go through all of your repos and start googling snippets to see if you just pulled half of this thing from someone else. So, no, a portfolio of any kind doesn't prove you can code. It's certainly nice to see because it gives me things I can ask you about during the interview, but it's not proof.
Having said that, I have found that presenting people with a complex snippet and asking them what it does is just as effective as any code test. It takes much less time, there's a lot less pressure because they aren't coding in front of you, and honestly, we all spend a lot more time reading code than writing it. It also gives them a chance to talk about anything they would do differently to improve the code.
I don't have time to figure out if you actually wrote the code in your portfolio
I always wondered if there is a coding job where you take existing code to make it do what you want. I'm not a programmer, but I've created programs from existing snippets and modified as required. Performing selects, updates, deletes on data is simple, especially since there is a shit ton of existing code that already does it. Just need to modify it to match what's needed.
Real programmers do not like those people. I have seen code like this and it is absolutely abysmal. They don't know enough in the first place to know what's worth copying so they just copy whatever appears to work based on some blog post. Then you inevitably get in there to fix it and can't understand why on earth they would be doing it that way. Then you realize, this code looks nothing like their other code. You slap a snippet into google and... there's your answer. They just cut & paste garbage from someplace without even understanding its purpose. Amazingly horrible code. If you do this, your coworkers will despise you.
Grabbing snippets to run a SQL query != mashing together snippets to create production code.
So there is a career in it? I don't give a shit if they like me or not.
But this brings up a point. Why can't there be a code of excellence repository? Starting code from scratch, in more cases, is just a waste of time. Most of the things that need to be done are already written. So why not standarize on it?
A career? Not really. You'll only get hired at places that don't do any sort of technical interview (which are already awful). As soon as people catch on you're going to get fired because your code is the equivalent of AIDS.
There are repositories and there are standards. Those are called frameworks, sometimes components or libraries. People use them all the time. You can still get into trouble with those, but it's significantly different from just cutting & pasting random crap from the Internet.
If you can't be transparent to your boss about your copy pasting, then that is a red flag.
Also, if all you know how to do is wire existing shit together, you won't be able to succeed in a programming job.
It's still a skill though and makes you more valuable than your average person who can't do anything with a computer outside of MS office. But this isn't usually its own position. Usually you would still need domain credentials in some field, get an "analyst" position or something like that, and then just use the computer skills to push your productivity to the next level. There are lots of non-programmerd who have the skills you do and it sounds like you'd fall into that crop. It's not a bad place to be but it'd be hard to get a legit programming gig.
I failed these types of tests before. I failed them because my mind is wired differently than textbook samples. But when you look at my developers history, I will bring your project to a success.
Assign the candidate a real feature/bugfix to implement from home, remunerated accordingly. Make them sign an NDA, and both parties will have come out benefitted from the exchange.
You're right. I didn't know what remunerated meant so I must have glossed over and assumed wrongly. I feel silly now.
2: I've already expressed interest in their position. I have a day job, and several side projects: I won't spend a sizable chunk of my free time so they can tick some boxes about my coding skills.
But someone who doesn't know how to code or is unemployed WILL spend a sizable chunk of their day going to interviews and wasting peoples time.
Simple questions such as: Make a loop that says "Hello World" 5 times in whatever language you're most experienced in.
Those should be sufficient to tell the people who have never coded in their life from those who have.
for(int i=0;i++;i<5) printf("Hello World");
Boom, done. And like that you weeded out a huge chunk of people. You don't need anything complicated to weed them out. Sure, you'll get the C in 21 days folks but from the interview you can ask them questions about their own projects and experiences. Hopefully you can wiff out bullshit.
That's the thing though- if you have someone who comes in claiming to be an experienced coder, you don't need to be so condescending as to make them write a code snippet. It should be apparent just from talking to them. Ask them for a story about a time when they were challenged by a low-level programming situation on a past job. If they start talking about how a concurrency bug was introduced by the fact that an assignment to a 32-bit variable marked as 'volatile' was not properly ensured to be an atomic operation by the proprietary compiler for the 16-bit architecture they were working on, you'll have a pretty good idea they can code. Then you can ask them more questions about what the software did and what the implementation looked like and so on. How hard is it for a programmer to recognize another programmer in conversation? Trivial.
The only reason coding questions are needed is at a shithole like amazon where they have such high turnover that they don't even know what percentage of their current devs are capable of programming. They have to institute such policies because nobody plans on working there longer than a couple years and so they don't give two fucks about the capabilities of the candidate.
so waste my time on a lot of wannabe's? no tanks. ill give them a small bit of something to remove the liars. if you can't pass my simple 15 second test, you wont last long as a developer anyways. i dont havee time to inerview 50 people, 30 of which know fuk all about programming. you can, that's on you.
sorry, bit drunk now.. i think im going to stop now.
Yeah you are probably right. It might depend on the position / industry / resume a lot. I think probably once you get away from entry level programmer for high profile companies, you'd get less BS candidates.
I can't imagine a way, at all, where you aren't a little bit questioning their ability. Whether it's a test or through talking.
I am a terrible test taker but an amazing interviewee. Hell if you ask me to do FizzBuzz I'll probably so fuck it and leave (because I'd look like an idiot) but if you ask where a race condition is in a bit of code I could pick it out easily. I'm the guy that you can give a simple problem and say "explain how you got there" and I have a deer in headlights look. Give me a complex problem and I'm all yours.
Every job I've ever gotten was because I knew someone. Only two had a "test" that the blog refers to. One of which, to this day, I'm still the highest test taker on it. The other.. I did shit on and still landed the job. And now we've brought back my .NET 1.1 memories that I thought I drank away... fuck me.
edit: removed some stuff because I'd rather not be head hunted.
I have to disagree with the article. The coding test is to weed out the idiots who think they can code until presented with a non-textbook problem, or those who borrow someone else's CV just to get an interview.
You're sounding really really pretentious here, and unfortunately this way of thinking is also real common among people who lack skills, so watch out.
Weed out the non-coders from the ones that do
We assume you can code already otherwise the recruiter/headhunter/HR would not have contacted us.
Only get the developers that are interested enough to perform their test in a ordered and timely manner.
I assure you that most developers I interview have yet to ever raise a concern about being tested, regardless of what point they are in their careers.
Gather insight about my proficiency for their position
A lot of times it is more about your problem solving skills and creativity, than whether or not you actually finished the problem.
I know how to code, and can show it. They can check my blog, my numerous repositories on GitHub, my public sample projects, my freelancing portfolio, and even my fully-working apps and sites out there.
You seem to think a hiring manager has enough time to review all of your stuff. We don't have that much time for you, we're already over worked as it is. Also, I don't know what stuff in your repository is all yours or collaborative or something else altogether.
I've already expressed interest in their position. I have a day job, and several side projects: I won't spend a sizable chunk of my free time so they can tick some boxes about my coding skills.
Unfortunately the reality is that there are a million guys from India who will.
Take into account that the big companies will get most of those first. Mid sized companies get a few. Tiny companies usually get none. Hence, smaller companies will be easier to start at.
No matter how general or specific their tests is, it will never replace the proper way to see if someone fits your position: work with them on the real job, and see how it feels.
Nothing can really do this reliably except for interning, and that is a ridiculous time investment. I want to see if you can solve problems and use your brain, period.
As for your alternatives.
Bring the candidate to the office for a day, and work together. They'll get to know the company and its environment, and the company can see how the candidate fits within their team and culture.
Intern for a day? 1 day is hardly enough to learn a stack if it isn't exactly what you already do. However, as it is it would be more valuable than a non technical interview. Some could say you'd also be lowering the performance of the rest of the team through distraction, but overall I think this is viable.
Pair program with people from your team for an hour or two (Screenhero works great), so the candidate can learn from them as they learn from him/her.
Same problem as above, also potential confidentiality problems in some cases.
Assign the candidate a real feature/bugfix to implement from home, remunerated accordingly. Make them sign an NDA, and both parties will have come out benefitted from the exchange.
This again can work for small companies/teams, but if you're work is unacceptable then we've wasted that money and that time as well as legal's time, so for large companies this just wouldn't happen.
I agree with you, not sure why you're getting downvoats. This attitude would seem nearly identical to the one of someone who can't code.
This is like when people get back their tests and get angry because it doesn't really represent their mastery of a subject. They say: "Of course I can do the work! Look at my homeworks, projects, and open note quizzes! I obviously understand the material!". They are just bad test takers they'll say - which is imo way too common of an excuse.
Almost anyone could eventually figure out the test a company gives you if you were free to use the Internet and look at code repositories...
Personally tests are learning opportunity for me. Either I know the answer and can strengthen my knowledge while applying the solution, or I don't know the solution and I must learn a new way to do something. Even when failing tests, make it a point to never fail that material again
Right.. which is why I chose not to say they are the same attitude, but rather to point at that to an observer they would seem nearly identical - exactly like I said in the passage you quoted.
This person took a lot of time to write this post and there is some real gold within, please take the time to read.
I would simply add that just as important as your ability to code / do your job is you ability to get along, stfu, and execute a simple task without it turning into a UN debate. Too many know nothings come along and start telling everyone how things need to be and throwing around words like "wrong" with zero knowledge of how an organization got to where it is and why. Many decisions are cost based based and, real life spoiler,
The way to improve an organization is to master their model and gain reputation, eventually people will want to listen to you, then you can improve things.
I assure you that most developers I interview have yet to ever raise a concern about being tested, regardless of what point they are in their careers.
Most devs probably don't feel it's worth their time to tell you how stupid your test is, and instead just bin the application and mark your emails as spam. Real talk bro.
I understand a lot of HR types love their tests and think they are super clever for devising them, but the reality is that no one gives a wet shit about your "programming triathalon".
You're working on a lot of misconceptions here. Firstly, HR types don't know shit about coding. If the test is out of a book or online and the HR people are looking up in a book to find out what the answer is, then that is a warning sign right there. If you're doing the test during the interview, then it is part of the technical interview. It likely came from someone on the development team or the person giving the interview. This is a chance for you to show off and not for an HR type to waste time and money being clever. Mind that you can also use this as an opportunity to size up the interviewer's skills, as you will likely be working for or with that person.
40 comments
11 u/aristotle07 04 Jan 2016 18:28
The biggest problem I have with coding test is not that I would have to do it. But there is no reciprocity.
They won't tell you anything about the job until you take the test.
I take the test pass it and find out that it is 20k below what I am making.
Then they are dumb enough to ask you, "Why do you want to work here?". If that isn't the dumbest question, I dont know what is. You're going through the interview process to decide why you want to work there. But many hirers have this attitude of here's our website, now we want people who are excited to work for us.
I've had more bad experience in doing coding tests, than positive. So I don't waste my time if they aren't willing to reciprocate. If they spend like 20-30 mins answering your questions, about the job, team culture, I have no problem doing the extra work.
Now if I get an email saying they are excited about my resume, but won't spend any time to explain, these things, I just delete it.
Whats worse is for even if you do the coding test, there is no dialogue. Like why did you do this vs doing that. If it doesn't conform to some eggheads way of programming, you don't even get an email back saying someone else was selected.
6 u/roznak 04 Jan 2016 19:18
I think the fact that they bring out a coding test, already demonstrates to you that this company sucks.
0 u/weezkitty 04 Jan 2016 20:12
That information should always been upfront
2 u/aristotle07 05 Jan 2016 00:16
Agree. But my experience is that people who want you to take coding tests are the equivalent of the robot phone calls. Its so automated there's no personal aspect to the hiring process.
I understand hiring new people is a very difficult and time consuming thing cause you can do coding tests and still get bad hires.
Bottom line though, I want to speak to a real person who can answer questions vs the HR person who doesn't know anything who gives you the coding test and then process you to the next step.
If I'm happy with the interview process and I feel I have a genuine interest in the company and the salary is within my range, I have no problems doing coding tests or coding projects.
I've literally had people tell me that salary, questions will be answered once I satisfy my end with the coding test.
9 u/idle_voating 04 Jan 2016 18:21
If you have a portfolio that shows your ability to develop stuff that works and a potential employer asks you to take some stupid coding test, I only recommend doing it if you need the money. Then get the fuck out of there as fast as possible after finding an employer who looks at your portfolio and says "this one looks like a good prospect, they make stuff that works."
Those coding tests have about as much to do with being a developer as the FE and PE exams have to do with real engineering.
edit. some grammar and wording.
6 u/WhiteRonin 04 Jan 2016 17:52
I'd probably fail their tests, yet can do my job.
Totally agree with this article.
6 u/ForgotMyName 04 Jan 2016 18:39
A portfolio isn't sufficient. I don't have time to figure out if you actually wrote the code in your portfolio. Even if I've narrowed down the applicant pool to five, I'm not going to go through all of your repos and start googling snippets to see if you just pulled half of this thing from someone else. So, no, a portfolio of any kind doesn't prove you can code. It's certainly nice to see because it gives me things I can ask you about during the interview, but it's not proof.
Having said that, I have found that presenting people with a complex snippet and asking them what it does is just as effective as any code test. It takes much less time, there's a lot less pressure because they aren't coding in front of you, and honestly, we all spend a lot more time reading code than writing it. It also gives them a chance to talk about anything they would do differently to improve the code.
1 u/TheDude2 04 Jan 2016 19:03
I always wondered if there is a coding job where you take existing code to make it do what you want. I'm not a programmer, but I've created programs from existing snippets and modified as required. Performing selects, updates, deletes on data is simple, especially since there is a shit ton of existing code that already does it. Just need to modify it to match what's needed.
1 u/ForgotMyName 04 Jan 2016 20:44
Real programmers do not like those people. I have seen code like this and it is absolutely abysmal. They don't know enough in the first place to know what's worth copying so they just copy whatever appears to work based on some blog post. Then you inevitably get in there to fix it and can't understand why on earth they would be doing it that way. Then you realize, this code looks nothing like their other code. You slap a snippet into google and... there's your answer. They just cut & paste garbage from someplace without even understanding its purpose. Amazingly horrible code. If you do this, your coworkers will despise you.
Grabbing snippets to run a SQL query != mashing together snippets to create production code.
1 u/TheDude2 04 Jan 2016 20:56
So there is a career in it? I don't give a shit if they like me or not.
But this brings up a point. Why can't there be a code of excellence repository? Starting code from scratch, in more cases, is just a waste of time. Most of the things that need to be done are already written. So why not standarize on it?
0 u/ForgotMyName 04 Jan 2016 20:59
A career? Not really. You'll only get hired at places that don't do any sort of technical interview (which are already awful). As soon as people catch on you're going to get fired because your code is the equivalent of AIDS.
There are repositories and there are standards. Those are called frameworks, sometimes components or libraries. People use them all the time. You can still get into trouble with those, but it's significantly different from just cutting & pasting random crap from the Internet.
1 u/TheDude2 04 Jan 2016 21:00
Not really. The process is almost identical.
1 u/ForgotMyName 04 Jan 2016 21:46
You're not a programmer. Don't make ridiculous claims when you have no idea wtf you're talking about.
1 u/TheDude2 04 Jan 2016 21:50
Copying code from something like a private git repository is the same process as copying it from github.com
1 u/onegin 05 Jan 2016 01:15
If you can't be transparent to your boss about your copy pasting, then that is a red flag.
Also, if all you know how to do is wire existing shit together, you won't be able to succeed in a programming job.
It's still a skill though and makes you more valuable than your average person who can't do anything with a computer outside of MS office. But this isn't usually its own position. Usually you would still need domain credentials in some field, get an "analyst" position or something like that, and then just use the computer skills to push your productivity to the next level. There are lots of non-programmerd who have the skills you do and it sounds like you'd fall into that crop. It's not a bad place to be but it'd be hard to get a legit programming gig.
3 u/roznak 04 Jan 2016 19:16
Completely agree.
I failed these types of tests before. I failed them because my mind is wired differently than textbook samples. But when you look at my developers history, I will bring your project to a success.
3 u/Foobarbaz 04 Jan 2016 21:42
If you ask me to fix a bug for you to get hired I'm going to ask how much you're willing to pay for my fix. Nothing is free. My time is not cheap.
0 u/foltaisaprovenshill 05 Jan 2016 07:54
You'll actually notice he mentioned compensation on that point. But okay.
0 u/Foobarbaz 05 Jan 2016 17:42
You're right. I didn't know what remunerated meant so I must have glossed over and assumed wrongly. I feel silly now.
2 u/via-patrino 04 Jan 2016 20:02
But someone who doesn't know how to code or is unemployed WILL spend a sizable chunk of their day going to interviews and wasting peoples time.
4 u/Foobarbaz 04 Jan 2016 21:48
This is often overlooked.
Simple questions such as: Make a loop that says "Hello World" 5 times in whatever language you're most experienced in.
Those should be sufficient to tell the people who have never coded in their life from those who have.
Boom, done. And like that you weeded out a huge chunk of people. You don't need anything complicated to weed them out. Sure, you'll get the C in 21 days folks but from the interview you can ask them questions about their own projects and experiences. Hopefully you can wiff out bullshit.
0 u/TheDude2 04 Jan 2016 22:01
People show up for an interview that can't code this?
3 u/Foobarbaz 04 Jan 2016 23:23
Yes. About 1/3-1/2 of the people do. These are the people who apply for everything.
For a helpdesk spot we had people come in who didn't know what an IP address was. I wish I were joking.
Honestly, this is why some department managers farm some of that work to HR.
0 u/BistroPalin 04 Jan 2016 23:30
And ... you've just outted yourself as someone who has never interviewed anyone.
1 u/onegin 05 Jan 2016 01:27
That's the thing though- if you have someone who comes in claiming to be an experienced coder, you don't need to be so condescending as to make them write a code snippet. It should be apparent just from talking to them. Ask them for a story about a time when they were challenged by a low-level programming situation on a past job. If they start talking about how a concurrency bug was introduced by the fact that an assignment to a 32-bit variable marked as 'volatile' was not properly ensured to be an atomic operation by the proprietary compiler for the 16-bit architecture they were working on, you'll have a pretty good idea they can code. Then you can ask them more questions about what the software did and what the implementation looked like and so on. How hard is it for a programmer to recognize another programmer in conversation? Trivial.
The only reason coding questions are needed is at a shithole like amazon where they have such high turnover that they don't even know what percentage of their current devs are capable of programming. They have to institute such policies because nobody plans on working there longer than a couple years and so they don't give two fucks about the capabilities of the candidate.
0 u/Foobarbaz 05 Jan 2016 02:04
so waste my time on a lot of wannabe's? no tanks. ill give them a small bit of something to remove the liars. if you can't pass my simple 15 second test, you wont last long as a developer anyways. i dont havee time to inerview 50 people, 30 of which know fuk all about programming. you can, that's on you.
sorry, bit drunk now.. i think im going to stop now.
0 u/onegin 05 Jan 2016 02:37
Yeah you are probably right. It might depend on the position / industry / resume a lot. I think probably once you get away from entry level programmer for high profile companies, you'd get less BS candidates.
1 u/Foobarbaz 05 Jan 2016 17:49
I can't imagine a way, at all, where you aren't a little bit questioning their ability. Whether it's a test or through talking.
I am a terrible test taker but an amazing interviewee. Hell if you ask me to do FizzBuzz I'll probably so fuck it and leave (because I'd look like an idiot) but if you ask where a race condition is in a bit of code I could pick it out easily. I'm the guy that you can give a simple problem and say "explain how you got there" and I have a deer in headlights look. Give me a complex problem and I'm all yours.
Every job I've ever gotten was because I knew someone. Only two had a "test" that the blog refers to. One of which, to this day, I'm still the highest test taker on it. The other.. I did shit on and still landed the job. And now we've brought back my .NET 1.1 memories that I thought I drank away... fuck me.
edit: removed some stuff because I'd rather not be head hunted.
1 u/flat_hedgehog 05 Jan 2016 01:03
I have to disagree with the article. The coding test is to weed out the idiots who think they can code until presented with a non-textbook problem, or those who borrow someone else's CV just to get an interview.
0 u/Techttz 04 Jan 2016 20:36
100% agree, I've passed on so many positions because of these worthless tests. Have gotten to the point of just like nope, I'll pass.
0 u/0x7a69 04 Jan 2016 23:42
You're sounding really really pretentious here, and unfortunately this way of thinking is also real common among people who lack skills, so watch out.
Weed out the non-coders from the ones that do
We assume you can code already otherwise the recruiter/headhunter/HR would not have contacted us.
Only get the developers that are interested enough to perform their test in a ordered and timely manner.
I assure you that most developers I interview have yet to ever raise a concern about being tested, regardless of what point they are in their careers.
Gather insight about my proficiency for their position
A lot of times it is more about your problem solving skills and creativity, than whether or not you actually finished the problem.
You seem to think a hiring manager has enough time to review all of your stuff. We don't have that much time for you, we're already over worked as it is. Also, I don't know what stuff in your repository is all yours or collaborative or something else altogether.
Unfortunately the reality is that there are a million guys from India who will. Take into account that the big companies will get most of those first. Mid sized companies get a few. Tiny companies usually get none. Hence, smaller companies will be easier to start at.
Nothing can really do this reliably except for interning, and that is a ridiculous time investment. I want to see if you can solve problems and use your brain, period.
As for your alternatives.
Intern for a day? 1 day is hardly enough to learn a stack if it isn't exactly what you already do. However, as it is it would be more valuable than a non technical interview. Some could say you'd also be lowering the performance of the rest of the team through distraction, but overall I think this is viable.
Same problem as above, also potential confidentiality problems in some cases.
This again can work for small companies/teams, but if you're work is unacceptable then we've wasted that money and that time as well as legal's time, so for large companies this just wouldn't happen.
0 u/SocratesOP 05 Jan 2016 03:36
I agree with you, not sure why you're getting downvoats. This attitude would seem nearly identical to the one of someone who can't code.
This is like when people get back their tests and get angry because it doesn't really represent their mastery of a subject. They say: "Of course I can do the work! Look at my homeworks, projects, and open note quizzes! I obviously understand the material!". They are just bad test takers they'll say - which is imo way too common of an excuse.
Almost anyone could eventually figure out the test a company gives you if you were free to use the Internet and look at code repositories...
Personally tests are learning opportunity for me. Either I know the answer and can strengthen my knowledge while applying the solution, or I don't know the solution and I must learn a new way to do something. Even when failing tests, make it a point to never fail that material again
1 u/foltaisaprovenshill 05 Jan 2016 07:56
Not really. It's the attitude of someone who doesn't like their time being wasted by people who can't code.
0 u/SocratesOP 05 Jan 2016 10:00
Right.. which is why I chose not to say they are the same attitude, but rather to point at that to an observer they would seem nearly identical - exactly like I said in the passage you quoted.
-1 u/GumbyTM 05 Jan 2016 03:46
This person took a lot of time to write this post and there is some real gold within, please take the time to read.
I would simply add that just as important as your ability to code / do your job is you ability to get along, stfu, and execute a simple task without it turning into a UN debate. Too many know nothings come along and start telling everyone how things need to be and throwing around words like "wrong" with zero knowledge of how an organization got to where it is and why. Many decisions are cost based based and, real life spoiler,
The way to improve an organization is to master their model and gain reputation, eventually people will want to listen to you, then you can improve things.
0 u/foltaisaprovenshill 05 Jan 2016 07:55
Most devs probably don't feel it's worth their time to tell you how stupid your test is, and instead just bin the application and mark your emails as spam. Real talk bro.
I understand a lot of HR types love their tests and think they are super clever for devising them, but the reality is that no one gives a wet shit about your "programming triathalon".
1 u/0x7a69 05 Jan 2016 08:53
You're working on a lot of misconceptions here. Firstly, HR types don't know shit about coding. If the test is out of a book or online and the HR people are looking up in a book to find out what the answer is, then that is a warning sign right there. If you're doing the test during the interview, then it is part of the technical interview. It likely came from someone on the development team or the person giving the interview. This is a chance for you to show off and not for an HR type to waste time and money being clever. Mind that you can also use this as an opportunity to size up the interviewer's skills, as you will likely be working for or with that person.