Re:Hiring Is Broken: What Do Developers Say About Technical ...
by staticassertion on Thursday August 15, 2019 @05:47PM
(#20710025)
For what it's worth, I'm not convinced that my approach will actually let more "bad" people through. My personal opinion is that you will improve both your rate of good candidate hiring and lower your rate of good candidate rejection.
I believe that the existing system intends to optimize heavily for "reject bad candidates" and actually fails at that too.
Give candidates a take home, then review it with them.
I have a lot of reasons for believing this approach would be far superior to the "sit in a room and get interrogated for 7 hours" approach.
The problem is once you offer them a job you stop searching for a candidate. Then you get a bad hire and even if it's quick you won't really know for a while, so then you're really behind.
It's bad enough when you hire someone who really wasn't qualified but didn't do anything bad. Now you have to get rid of someone who probably left a previous position and, like above, you have to go get someone to do the job you were hiring for in the first place. Worst of all possible worlds.
Perhaps the calculus is different in a big company, but for a startup your approach sounds pretty bad.