Perspectives from engineering, talent acquisition, the Interview Engineer, and the candidate
Starting the hiring process with a live technical interview might seem like a luxury. Software engineering time is so constrained that most engineering leaders (87%) agree that “it would be easier to reach hiring targets if they had more time to interview candidates” and 61% agree that “interviews are a financial drain on my company.” In response, many companies place a take-home or online code test at the top of the hiring funnel in an effort to limit engineering time spent interviewing. However, due to poor candidate experience and poor signal compared to live interviews, code tests often end up taking more engineering time to vet candidates and decrease hiring yield from an already limited talent pipeline.
Compromising signal and candidate experience impacts many stakeholders. Here, we’ll explore the value of the signal and positive experience delivered by a fair, predictive, and enjoyable technical interview through the eyes of engineering, talent acquisition, the Interview Engineer, and the candidate.
Capture signal on critical skills
In May of 2020, 64% of engineering leaders reported that interviewing is a drain on their team’s morale. Time spent interviewing the right candidates can be energizing, but time spent interviewing the wrong candidates can be draining.
Code tests often lack the opportunities for the candidate to demonstrate a competency and lack of live interviewer participation can also allow for cheating. As a result, the hiring funnel retains the wrong candidates and dedicates valuable engineering time to interviewing them.
Engineering productivity and morale can be improved by reducing false positives with a live technical interview aligned to your hiring bar.
They can also unintentionally filter candidates out due to a binary pass/fail recommendation that requires absolute completeness and correctness.