stephenhogsten

Everything will be gamed when there are stakes.

Whatever is closest to the real skills you need will makes it harder to improve at the measure without also improving at the real job skills. At least that would be the dream.

I've seen a middle ground where a timebox is enforced, but there's a discussion question for what next steps would be

Compared to committing to a specific hour block of time for a normal interview, isn't it more flexible?

I guess it depends on how the company uses it - if they just stick the take-home in as an extra filter vs trying to replace live interview time

I don't want to speak for the last commenter, but I think they meant google for literal solutions to this take-home (i.e. cheating to beat the timer).

I do strongly agree that people should be able to use whatever resources they normally have (google, mdn, autocompleting editor, etc.). This is how they would work on the job. Getting quizzed on easily referenced random trivia about language features is so dumb.

That's what I had in mind. You would need a tool to enforce it.

At that point "take-home" may not be the best name anymore, but "remote interview" just sounds like it's an interview over video. Maybe "async interview"?

True. More stress than an untimed take-home, but I would think less stress than a normal interview (for most engineers, at least).

These are great points.

How do you feel about take-homes that have an enforced cap at 60-120 minutes to try to remove the competition on time investment?

Do you learn more than it's possible to learn asynchronously? Most take-homes only have candidates write code, but it's possible to understand a candidate more deeply by asking questions about, for example, how they approached the decisions they made.