Technical Interviews Are Getting Insulting
The higher the level of the role, the more that technical interviews start to become insulting. And now I cannot wait to read all of the comments explaining how wrong I am.
I have over 9 years of Python programming experience, almost 10. Asking me to do a "coding challenge" is an insult to my experience and skill level. But I have to put up with it, because that is the unfortunate norm in Software Engineering today.
To dig into this deeper, though, we need to talk about Software Engineers. An engineer is a problem-solver who applies scientific and mathematical principles to design, build, and optimize systems, machines, and processes that improve daily life. Whether inventing new technologies, refining existing ones, or ensuring safety and efficiency, engineers combine creativity, technical expertise, and strategic thinking to turn ideas into reality. What separates engineering disciplines is just how they do engineering. As you might guess, Software Engineers use software (whaaaaaaat?) to engineer (you don't say...).
But wait, in "my" [insert country/territory/region here] requires engineers to have a certification. I hear you, and that's some convoluted mess to go into. Canada, for example, requires a P.Eng certification for a Software Engineer title, but the exact same work can be done under the Software Developer title. Even getting the cert doesn't even mean getting paid more, which is one of many reasons why these laws tend to be considered dated and ambiguous.
Maybe we should regulate the role, though. I mean, when a Tesla runs over people on autodrive because the software failed to work properly, the driver is at fault because they are ultimately still supposed to be in control of the vehicle, but how many of you kind of agree that maybe the software engineering team behind that software should have tested and perfected it more? All these layoffs would be a different story if we all had regulated titles and protections with our career. But that creates a steeper barrier of entry if it requires a bunch of additional hoops to get into the roles in the first place.
What about other engineers? Mechanical Engineers need degrees/certification. Civil Engineers do to. If they mess up at their jobs, things can blow up, fall apart, cause serious problems, cause accidents, etc. Interviewing a Civil Engineer, they might ask them theoretical questions about the work they expect them to do, but they don't ask them to go pave a small section of "road" in an engineering challenge. No, the certifications and degrees back up their skill, and they are treated like knowledgeable professionals. Moreso, their interviews tend to be more about team fit and experience with the problems they are trying to solve.
Going back to certifications and degrees, why do they exist? What is their purpose? To prove expertise. That's it. They prove that someone holding the certification can do the job. But what does experience prove? Oh, you know, the same thing. And if you poll this out: "Which is better, degree or experience?", hands down, experience would win. Because experience is tangible proof of applied knowledge where a certificate or degree is industry approved proof of knowledge, albeit unapplied or untested in the real world.
Insulting. That's the word I used. Most notably, doing these coding challenges are insulting. I can go deep into a Software Engineering conversation, and I can easily validate my experience that way. I prefer it. I feel more respected, like my experience is worth discussing and matters. When I do a coding challenge, it's almost like all of this professional attitude gets thrown out. It could be a leetcode test, or something out of Google Docs. I've had zip files I've had to work with, live "watch me code" exams. I've been accused of using AI, or "why did you do this, not that?" And not the way "they" would have done it.
Maybe I just suck at coding challenges. Except, I finish some of them and I think "wow, that was wild and I love the approach I took and got it to work." I know I am not horrible at doing them. Some of them, though, just seem impossible, unless you are using AI or came across a similar question 20 times while binging LeetCode practice questions. "Write your own crazy function that will do this one specific thing that already exists in a series of popular modules, oh and you have 32.8 minutes to do it." Who would otherwise realistically solve something like this without memorization or AI? Not to mention, I've never heard of a successful coding challenge convincing a company to keep an otherwise bad employee. "But they did so well in the interview/code challenge. Firing them for one valid reason would be a mistake!" Said no one ever.
Regulation would not fix coding challenges, either. The only fix for them is not doing them. I am seeing these murmurs on LinkedIn, to boot, that are people claiming they refuse to do these coding challenges, and yet they still land the job. I call malarkey. If that was the case, coding challenges wouldn't matter in the first place, and are just being employed because that's how that hiring manager/lead engineer has seen other people interview Software Engineers. Unoriginal, demeaning, why even bother? Just ask questions. Spend your time going deep about coding in conversation, instead. Learn about the candidate, ask them how they like to code, what they champion and what they disagree with.
Let's face it, the Software Engineering industry is being dragged through the proverbial mud right now. Demand is as high as ever for Software Engineers, yet companies are acting like that's not the case, with lowballing pay bands, and upping the requirements, then complaining that they cannot find people. If you are employed, and in a position to interview Software Engineers, do everyone a solid, and get rid of these demeaning, impractical, and fruitless coding exams. Hire people based on their interview and their skill or experience.
Yet another inefficiency in the tech hiring process.
ReplyDeleteI agree.
ReplyDeleteThe equivalent in other jobs might be finance or marketing. Some marketing folks are asked to create a slide deck while financial analysts are asked to do a case study.
Civil engineers might be asked to create something on CAD.