In interviewing I try to avoid approaches that in any form or shape resemble riddles, so ostensibly open problems but with predetermined acceptable answers.
I've found that it's both frustrating for the candidate and doesn't give me much insight.
Such a back and forth to me is too close for comfort, even though I used to be into role-playing games back in the day.
Currently I try to use the little time I have to determine whether the person in front of me is a charlatan, so only questions that are easy to answer for someone actually having the skills advertised in their CV.
Could you just have them sign an NDA and pair with people on some non-trade-secret real issue that needs addressing?
If you start by giving a little bit of context and then jump into some reasonable end of the backlog, then you get to see how they think of priorities, they get to ask you lots of contextual questions, you get negotiate with each other a thing to do, you get to investigate and/or develop a solution, and at the end of it all parties involved got lots of signal about what it’s like and what’s required to do the job. Not to mention you stand the chance of some normally useful thing getting further along too. Work with the person like they’re “consultant for a day” and see where you get to.
Why is our industry so resolute to come up with a bunch of bespoke, oblique representations of a job when the actual job is right there available to be used for assessment?
My favorite interview experience was a short take-home that required me to write a toy version of something the company actually did on a day-to-day basis, followed by an in-person pairing session to extend that toy to handle more functionality and cover certain edge cases.
Of course, the downside is that it required me to spend four hours working on this at home, and then another several hours at the interview - but having to spend time interviewing is something that cannot be avoided, so I'd much rather the time be spent on something relevant that actually shows off my abilities, rather than playing Advent of Code with money at stake, or filling out astrological profiles.
I have bills, and free labor doesn't pay them. If an employer spends 1-2 hours talking tech, the role, experience, culture fit, and maybe a quick "yes, I can code" toy PoC -- fine, I'll volunteer. But if one interview process requires a day+ of investment...I'll pass, thanks. Ditto for whiteboard hazing rituals, whose prerequisites include memorizing algo' arcana and cute puzzles. I have personal obligations, which I won't sacrifice to practice dancing like a clown for a stranger with a fetish for reinventing bubble sort or whatever.
Either respect my time and status as your peer, or don't bother wasting both of our time. If that means fewer opportunities for me, then so be it. My deathbed reflections won't include "Damn, I regret spending so much time with loved ones instead of learning how to optimally stack rings onto three pegs."
Apologies for the rant. I'm clearly passionate about this lol
Couldn't agree more; if the exercise takes more than 20-30 minutes, I am always asking if they are ok with me charging them my freelance hourly rate for the time needed to complete the exercise (regardless of hiring result).
I mean, sure, that's fine. But if you discount the take-home portion - four hours - everything else would still have taken time, because I had to spend time on the phone with HR for the initial screen, and I had to go in for an interview afterwards anyway, and ain't nobody going to pay you for the privilege of interviewing. And if I'm going to spend time displaying my abilities, doing it quietly at home on my own time is vastly better than in a shitty meeting room with two people breathing down my fucking neck.
Do take-homes suck, and unfairly privilege people with more free time? Yes. Are they slightly better than the other asinine bullshit interviewers love to throw at candidates? Fucking absolutely.
I've found that it's both frustrating for the candidate and doesn't give me much insight.
Such a back and forth to me is too close for comfort, even though I used to be into role-playing games back in the day.
Currently I try to use the little time I have to determine whether the person in front of me is a charlatan, so only questions that are easy to answer for someone actually having the skills advertised in their CV.