True. But as long as all candidates have the same time limit / same expectation of work depth, and the test providers have a reasonable expectation of how much can be accomplished in that timeframe, then it's fair.

That said, this demo should have a several hour time limit.

A standardized, precise 40-yard dash might be fair. But it is also pretty useless if you are evaluating runners for a 1 mile race, or a marathon.

I like this, let's consider how do you evaluate someone for a marathon.

Average marathon time is about 4.5 hours. Let's say you expect you're hired to last around 9 years (average is 8 according to GlassDoor but you're woebegone)

So scaling linearly, for every hour you get to assess a job candidate, you'd get 0.2 seconds to evaluate a potential marathoner.

Assuming a typical candidate gives you maybe 12, 24 hours tops, you have all of 3 to 5 seconds to evaluate a marathoner.

The futility of such an exercise is obvious.

The only solutions are to:

* insist on a longer evaluation period

* hire them on a probationary basis

* only hire people who have ran official marathons before, with proof and such

I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine what's right for their own evaluation process.

That is correct. We had to reduce the time duration to be able to handle the traffic. We recommend 90mins for this challenge. What do you think would the right amount of time for this problem?