TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The business of takehome assessments

37 点作者 shsachdev大约 1 年前

20 条评论

jcomis大约 1 年前
These are&#x2F;were rampant in product design hiring. Especially &quot;startups&quot; or smaller companies. The direction is always the same &quot;spend max a couple hours!&quot; but the understanding is clearly you must spend significantly more. Some are cute with clearly non work related problem, like a previous company I worked for that did &quot;design an app for a time machine&quot; or similar. But many are very very obviously current problems the company is facing.<p>In my last job search (~3 years ago) I was presented with many requests to complete a design challenge. I rejected them outright and the responses I got (typically from a 3rd party &quot;design recruiter&quot;) were quite astounding. Some acknowledged and moved on, but there were several who clearly expressed frustration, disdain, sometimes almost anger. One dropped me from another role I was working with them on for refusing.<p>Now it&#x27;s a total red flag for me. But judging from Blind posts it&#x27;s still a common practice.
评论 #40227019 未加载
评论 #40227974 未加载
advisedwang大约 1 年前
&gt;I’m 27 and single. There lies the biggest advantage of a takehome assessment for me: I get to spend more time on it than someone with a wife and two kids.<p>Counterpoint: those fresh out of school are likely to do the best in some &quot;invert a binary tree&quot; leetcode style interview, with that fresh in their memory. Those who are older (and thus more likely to have families) who actually have experience at the craft are most likely to be able to bang out an actual coding task quickly.
michaelt大约 1 年前
One of the major problems with take home tests is the rampant cheating.<p>It&#x27;s been a long time since I&#x27;ve been on the job market - but even a decade ago, I had third-party recruiters who would forward me a take home test... and another successful candidate&#x27;s solution, &quot;for reference&quot;.<p>And even if candidate <i>doesn&#x27;t</i> get external help, I&#x27;m extremely sceptical about time limits. Nothing stops someone spending 6 hours on a &quot;2 hour&quot; take home test, producing a better solution than someone who followed the time limit strictly.<p>It&#x27;s pretty hard to extract a signal under such circumstances. Unless you&#x27;re hiring for a job where a willingness to bend the rules to get results is desirable - used car sales, for example.
评论 #40226224 未加载
评论 #40226309 未加载
评论 #40226225 未加载
评论 #40226821 未加载
评论 #40227539 未加载
评论 #40226720 未加载
评论 #40226504 未加载
评论 #40226333 未加载
karaterobot大约 1 年前
Those four companies he cites (Matter-App, Adcellerant, Symplicity, Bidsight) that tell you to spend x hours, then tell you &quot;hey, but y&#x27;know, if you want to do [an open-ended number of additional hours for free], that&#x27;d be great!&quot; should all go sit in the corner.<p>Realistically, people are going to spend more time on their take-home assignments, because they perceive there&#x27;s an advantage to doing so. It&#x27;s not hard to imagine how this spirals out of control over time, a feedback loop of candidates trying to do more and more free, meaningless work as the bar is raised. A three-hour assignment that takes an entire weekend, a three-hour assignment that takes a week, etc. But they shouldn&#x27;t be openly encouraging this death spiral, they should be trying to keep it under control.<p>Better to say &quot;if it looks like you spent 20 hours on a 3 hour assignment, we&#x27;ll think of you as someone who isn&#x27;t good at estimating, and wastes a lot of time fiddling with things that are out of scope&quot;.
评论 #40229437 未加载
darth_avocado大约 1 年前
After reaching my 10 yoe mark, I almost explicitly refuse take home tests. Yes if there was only one company I wanted to work with and I was interviewing with only them, I&#x27;ll make an exception. Companies interview a lot of candidates to hire someone, as a result of which, you as a candidate have to interview 5-10 companies to get hired and get paid fairly, 15+ if you want to maximize your career + comp. There is no reason I&#x27;ll spend 40-80 hours on just take home tests alone, considering the fact that the company will still interview you for 4-5 more hours after you satisfactorily finish your take home.
评论 #40228271 未加载
Rinzler89大约 1 年前
<i>&gt;I’m 27 and single. There lies the biggest advantage of a takehome assessment for me: I get to spend more time on it than someone with a wife and two kids.</i><p>I noticed the same thing. It seems take homes are mainly geared towards pre-selecting young single people with a lot of free time to code on the side besides their main job and other responsibilities, or who have no other responsibilities.<p>Now I&#x27;m also single and I have the time to invest in them, but I question the future of my career in tech, how will I be able to compete for new jobs later when I won&#x27;t be, and take homes will be normalized? I don&#x27;t remember my friends in other careers ever having to do unpaid work before getting a job. Perhaps I chose the wrong career.<p>What sucks even more is when you sink many hours in them and then just get ghosted, not even a rejection message, nada. I&#x27;ve already been burned twice by this. Or when the recruiter just spams you the take home link without first having a talk with you about the job details, the compensation range, if you&#x27;re a good fit, etc. It&#x27;s &quot;first you solve this take home for us, then we can have a talk&quot;. Feels incredibly cold and inhumane.
评论 #40226263 未加载
评论 #40226117 未加载
评论 #40226942 未加载
评论 #40226132 未加载
评论 #40228182 未加载
aiauthoritydev大约 1 年前
Having interviewed hundreds of consultants and been interviewed by many and having seen the cheating etc. from all sides I have first hand opinion on this.<p>Sadly how people recruit is completely broken for most companies that are not FAANG etc. (It is broken for FAANG as well but in a different way).<p>As I often say &quot;you need to win, not win an argument&quot;. Similarly you want candidates that can be good productive members of your team at the salary you are paying and not the candidates who can nail your interview process.<p>The problem with take home tests is not the cheating. But rather failure of the recruiter to actually evaluate the assignment. Do you care about the end result or do you care about the art of craft ? Do you care about readability of the code or performance of the app ? Is the assignment similar to the work candidate will end up doing at workplace ?<p>My suggestion generally has been:<p>1. Look at candidate&#x27;s past work. Has candidate worked with reputed companies ? 2. Talk with candidate with general technology topics around their work. Something like &quot;what do you like about react?&quot; 3. Give candidate a very simple codesignal test. Nothing to fancy. Say if you want react engineers just test their ability to implement simple components.<p>This vastly kills a lot of inferior talent in my opinion.<p>4. Give a very simple problem without any &quot;trick&quot; or &quot;iq test&quot; and ask the candidate to code it in front of you. Also let the candidate use internet, documentation and AI tools.<p>In this day and age asking candidates NOt to use AI tools like asking a candidate to write code without using keyboard. You want people who can use things like Github copilot.
评论 #40226905 未加载
ilc大约 1 年前
It is at the point where for me when they ask for a take home, it is a self selecting: Thanks but no thanks.<p>I can spend time answering your take-home, or trying to get other interviews. From what I&#x27;ve seen on take homes: Other interviews are strongly EV+.<p>Before you go: But you never got a job off a take home, that&#x27;s why. I did. It was one of the worst managed misfits I&#x27;ve had. I am sure others thrived there, for me it was a living hell, that didn&#x27;t even pay that great.<p>So... Much like requiring a suit to interview and a few other things. It goes in my bin of &quot;Your company has performed self selection.&quot;<p>Note: I will leetcode, at least there is a human there, we&#x27;re talking, interacting, and I am learning about the company.. But most of all, that feel of: I put up and hour, you put up an hour. Let&#x27;s talk. Is very real.
CM30大约 1 年前
I think the timer is probably something that doesn&#x27;t get enough attention here. Lots of people say about how these select for people with lots of free time, and that&#x27;s very true, but they also seem to be biased towards people that don&#x27;t tend to freak out in stressful situations&#x2F;do well with a clock rapidly ticking down behind them.<p>Which... doesn&#x27;t necessarily correlate to someone being good at programming or web development or what not. Or whether they&#x27;ll be good at the job in general, given that most engineering roles don&#x27;t have someone screaming &quot;get this done in under an hour or else!&quot; with no time to think things through properly.<p>At the same time though, I can also see why they do that, since otherwise it comes down to &quot;whoever&#x27;s got the most free time and willingness to grind away at the problem&quot;, turning an hour long exercise into a 3 day one in the process.
kenschu大约 1 年前
Founder of new tech assessment company &#x2F; mentioned in article here.<p>We&#x27;re biased, but we think the old form of take-home assessments (+ classic Leetcode tests, etc) are completely broken. Beyond reasons you all mention - they&#x27;re completely unreliable today in the age of ChatGPT, etc. Way too easy to cheat.<p>We&#x27;re seeing candidates copy takehome instructions into an LLM, paste the solution and submit in &lt;5 minutes. It&#x27;s hard to write a problem that&#x27;s (1) low enough scope to solve in a short time, but (2) hard enough that LLMs can&#x27;t step towards sovling it.<p>At Ropes - we&#x27;re using LLMs to evaluate <i>how</i> candidates code, not just the final solution. So HM&#x27;s can step in and look at a timeline of actions taken to reach the solution, instead of just the final answer. How do candidates debug? What edge cases do they consider? Etc. We think these answers hold real signal and can be answered for the first time async.<p>We&#x27;re trying to make this better for candidates too. E.g. (1) shorter assessments, (2) you can often use your own IDE, (3) you&#x27;re not purely evaluated on test cases, etc. But we&#x27;re not yet perfect. If this sounds interesting &#x2F; you have strong thoughts I&#x27;d love to talk to you - email is in my bio.
shagie大约 1 年前
&gt; The majority of the companies I noticed issuing takehomes weren’t your star companies. They weren’t FAANG. They weren’t looking to change the world. They weren’t looking for olympiad champions or kumon alumnis.<p>&gt; Rather, they were the design studios, the lean web development agencies, the mobile dev teams based out of Eastern Europe.<p>Given a team of... let&#x27;s make up some numbers.... {8} devs working on client projects that have {250} candidates to evaluate, how much time do the {senior} members of the team have to evaluate them? Note that taking {two} senior devs in such a shop out for {30 minutes} for each candidate for a live coding interview is {=about a week and a half} of nothing but doing interviews for each of them - removing them from other revenue generating tasks and a reduction of {at least 1&#x2F;4th} of the work for that duration.<p>Extending this beyond 2 weeks of time means that the best candidates are likely to have found other opportunities.<p>Take home tasks shifts that time to a standardized &quot;I can look at this sample code in 2-3 minutes and get a feel of if the candidate will be producing something maintainable or hot garbage.&quot;<p>At that point, one can narrow down the pool of candidates down to a small number that can be interviewed and decided with some expedience.
评论 #40226395 未加载
somethoughts大约 1 年前
Would be curious to get people&#x27;s input - Assuming you were a candidate with a decent resume but no significant public Github activity, would it be an interesting alternative to a take home assessment or in person white board coding session, if a hiring manager suggested that you fork an open source project of your choice and make a PR of your choice (or other contribution)?
Sohcahtoa82大约 1 年前
I don&#x27;t think we&#x27;ll ever solve the problem of interviewing software engineers.<p>- Whiteboard coding tasks put a LOT of pressure on you to perform while being watched in a stressful high-stakes situation, which is a situation that the extreme majority of SWEs won&#x27;t deal with, and many simply can&#x27;t. They also tend to test for algorithms (inverting a binary tree, etc.), something that is unrelated to most actual jobs.<p>- Takehome assessments are unfair to those with a family that might not have the free time to do them, and if you&#x27;re applying for multiple jobs, can easily become a full-time job on their own.<p>- Performing a 5+ round interview gauntlet is frustrating and absurd, and can make the hiring process take well over a month.
评论 #40228275 未加载
gwbas1c大约 1 年前
This:<p>&gt; If the very first thing in your application process is a 6 hour long unpaid assignment, then it’s hard to imagine you’re not wasting someone’s time because at this stage you’ve barely done any filtering.<p>I pretty much walk away at this point. It&#x27;s like asking a person for sex after buying them a drink. (And if I have to explain why, you clearly don&#x27;t get it.)<p>&gt; But if the takehome is offered, say, after 3 rounds of interviews and will be discussed in detail during your final round with a panel of two senior engineers, I think that’s fair and provides a strong signal.<p>Exactly. That&#x27;s the point that I&#x27;m willing to invest in a takehome.
jl2718大约 1 年前
It’s just astounding to me that people can pay $x00,000 to spend 4-10 years on a single discipline, and still not have the minimal required proof of competence to get a job.<p>And how are these big tech firms spending $billions on recruiting and interview time, as if the education credential is worthless, but still preferring to use it as a first-line filter?
ativzzz大约 1 年前
I had a previous job that paid me for the time it took to do a takehome interview. (it ended up being right at the minimum before having to report it as taxable income). I highly welcome this, as it signals a commitment from the company that they&#x27;re serious about the candidate
imiric大约 1 年前
The solution is simple: pay candidates for the estimated time the assignment should take, based on the median rate of the role they&#x27;re applying for. Pay them regardless if they pass or fail the test. You should be able to avoid grifters looking for handouts if your screening process is any good.<p>But I don&#x27;t think this type of evaluation is a valuable signal anymore in the age of AI. Anyone could nowadays finish your take home assignment in a fraction of the effort it would take them without AI. This might not be relevant after they&#x27;re hired, since they would likely also use AI assistants, but for evaluation purposes you want to assess how someone thinks about problem solving, not how they generate the solution, and then confidently walk you through it.<p>The best interview style for software developers IMO is the code review challenge. Show them a piece of code from a hypothetical PR of a junior developer, and ask them to a) describe what the code does, b) point out any issues they see, and c) fix the issues. You can have several difficulty levels depending on the role and expected candidate experience, or you can cherry pick these from your own codebase. The benefits of this approach are that it&#x27;s a simulation of a real-world task they would be doing on a daily basis, it&#x27;s a collaborative effort and showcases their communication skills, while also allowing them to evaluate yours, it&#x27;s much less stressful than white boarding and quizzing sessions though still involves some coding, and unlike take home assignments, it can be completed in an hour or 90 minutes at most.
评论 #40226789 未加载
评论 #40226661 未加载
评论 #40226670 未加载
评论 #40230527 未加载
dec0dedab0de大约 1 年前
we had one of these at a previous job, and I was vocally against it the whole time. Even though it did weed out a few clueless people that seemed to know what they were doing during the interview.<p>the project was to make a django app for storing your pokemon application, and a script to download the list of pokemon from an api. So atleast it was fun, but i hated turning people down who took the time to do it.
EdwardDiego大约 1 年前
What I hate is that there&#x27;s no often no discussion about your solution. I want to go &quot;here, this is my solution&quot;, and then have a discussion with the people hiring where they might ask stuff like &quot;you chose to do X this way, what was your reasoning?&quot;<p>Also, enough with the fucking Roman numerals, Jesus Christ.
SonOfLilit大约 1 年前
I recently designed a take-home. I made sure to pick a real, interesting, problem we faced, and one where there is a very high dynamic range of responses - it can distinguish between good and bad juniors (I know this because I let all my students try it if they want, which also gave me great deal flow of juniors without even needing to spend time on screening the bad ones), and it gives some information even at my level (I didn&#x27;t arrive at the best possible solution myself, someone came up with a better solution to one subproblem).<p>I like respecting candidates&#x27; time, because I want the strongest candidates to not filter themselves out at the mention of a take-home. That&#x27;s why I ask them to schedule 4 hours with me where at the start they will get the problem description and at the end they will submit what they have - this way they aren&#x27;t pressured to put in more time because they know for sure that their competitors didn&#x27;t - and I get to compare apples to apples.<p>I also designed the rules to minimize the perverse incentives set by the clock by giving multiple ways to get recognition for partial solutions.<p>This is the content of the document the candidate gets initially (they only get the actual problem later):<p>Meta<p>This is a real task we encountered and solved at Finubit. Out of respect for your time, we limit this task to 4 hours (of wallclock time, to remove the incentive to spend more than that to gain a competitive advantage). It took us much more than four hours to get the perfect solution, so don&#x27;t worry, we don’t expect a full production-ready solution to 100% of the problem.<p>We ask that you approach this task as you would the first 4 hours out of as much time as you need to finish the task to a reasonable quality standard. We do want to see a working Proof Of Concept at the end of those 4 hours, like we would ask of any team member picking up a long, open-ended research task. The POC can be very limited in functionality, but functionality that it promises will be held to a standard of quality.<p>If you encounter ambiguities or mistakes, assume the most reasonable way to resolve them and make a note to check with Product that your understanding was correct. If you disagree with Product about something, make a note to push back against the design decision they made (but in the meantime assume the current spec, unless it&#x27;s grossly wrong). If there&#x27;s a subcomponent in your design that you don&#x27;t know how to implement but believe to be solvable, it&#x27;s OK to assume the existence of a black box that solves it.<p>Please take a moment to set an alarm clock. When the clock strikes 4 hours, please send us your code and research notes, and then go over the code and document everything you’d change before you consider the code production-ready and send us the annotated code.<p>We will be available to answer clarification questions if needed.<p>Then there is a checklist to reduce loss on technicalities (forgetting to set an alarm or send annotations).<p>(If you&#x27;re in Israel, and you want to try it for fun, shoot me an email)