You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Whilst hiring for perm staff is a more arduous process than contractors, there's still loads of candidates who are forced into a code exam that the customer hosts.
Here's my thoughts on the cost/benefit analysis:
Short Term Cost
Short Term Benefits
Developer(s) from the company need to book out 2.5 hours for every candidate
Developer(s) of the company are able to give a code exam that is with their codebase
The employer may feel obliged to give someone a fair shake even if the interview is not going well for any reason but still spend this 2.5hrs)
A developer may prefer the face to face interview to get to know the client and who they'll be working with; maybe better candidate selection by proxy)
Candidate selection is slower as you need these 2 developers to be booking in these interviews in between other meetings and engagements, and the time has to work for the candidate too.
It might be quicker for someone to explain a few basic programming things rather than set hard DS&A questions in interviewing platforms)
The developer may have completed a very similar assessment e.g. C# which is very similar to the language used.
Feedback to the candidate will be quicker as it could be delivered in this assessment.
Long Term Cost
Long Term Benefits
Candidate selection is limited as the developer does not wish to travel (C-19, 1000 miles away or even just simply does not wish to go through a 3 or 4 step process)
You can be assured you have made a good decision should a candidate somehow fraudulently did this code quiz (even though the platforms do have this protection)
If you hire 3 developers a quarter and you for example have a candidate selection process, you'd have taken 2 developers out from day to day BAU (napkin math: 3 * 5 candidates * 2.5hrs incl prep. * 2 devs = 37.5hrs, an entire workweek a quarter)
You have more time interviewing the developer and understanding their thinking (e.g. the solution is worth nothing; the execution or showing an understanding of solving a problem is worth more)
Developers who are doing candidate code reviews actually break focus in the day
The questions asked in the interview take ages to create and also are questions most would possibly Google, therefore you end up with the problem where the test is in C# but the work is Wordpress
The code exam could be flawed in some way, in comparison to keeping it modern and fresh on interviewing platforms.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Whilst hiring for perm staff is a more arduous process than contractors, there's still loads of candidates who are forced into a code exam that the customer hosts.
Here's my thoughts on the cost/benefit analysis:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: