I hope I don't get yelled at, but damn that was funny. That stated it so perfectly.
The only "stress" in software development that I see on the job is trying to meet deadlines that either aren't realistic, or now moot due to (substantial) changes in requirements.
Bugs are normal. Prod issues are normal. Code that won't work as you envisioned or intended is normal. Problems that are hard to solve are normal. Any or all of the above sometimes require extra hours to resolve but that's not even in the same ballpark as "will I be homeless soon".
Phrased another way: being without money is not that stressful. Being without a way to make money is extremely stressful.
But wouldn't you say a driving test is to driving as a technical interview is to a development role?
- Please sketch out a diagram of a typical family sedan, be sure to mark and explain all major components.
- Do you drive stick? No? Well, please draw out the full mechanical diagram of a manual transmission.
- You are going down the street and an old lady steps suddenly off the sidewalk. Please sketch on this whiteboard what you would do.
- Please play 5 rounds of Need For Speed: Underground. You are required to come in 2nd or 1st in all rounds.
etc, etc. It definitely won't entail actual driving.
Best interview process ever, and that company had excellent programmers and the lowest employee turnover I've ever seen.
This is like saying "all drivers need to be able to drive well under stress, so let's test them while blaring a foghorn in their ear". Context is important.
I don't want to hire someone who is good at interviewing, I want to hire someone who is good at what I need them to do. While it may behoove the individual to train themselves on being better at interviews, as an employer it is a negative to wash someone out simply because they don't interview well.
Personally I rock at interviews, I've done easily 100+ interviews in my life at this point and I actually relax when I get into the room. This doesn't make me a better coder and it doesn't make me more qualified than the next guy who comes in with sweaty palms, and an employer whose heuristic uses interview-skill as a proxy for engineering-skill would be very misguided.
The entire problem with tech recruiting comes down to stupid proxies. We went through a phase where the top tech companies replaced real questions with logic brain teasers, as if that was a suitable proxy for real engineering ability. Now some startups are doing stupid shit like requiring extensive side projects, as if that is a suitable proxy for real engineering ability.
I'm not sure how many more years it will take for tech as an industry to realize that the best way to know someone is good at X, is to get them to do X.