2 added 209 characters in body
source | link

It should be assumed that their resume shows that they can code, otherwise why would you be interviewing them? If you can't see that they code don't bring them in, you are wasting your time.

That said, I would worry more about how they approach the solution than the mechanical part of the solution ( the code ), and how they communicate their solution. This is why whiteboards exist.

If you provide them with a base set of requirements and the first thing they don't do is start asking for specifics, then that is a strike. You should have a specific set of things you want to hear them say or ask before hand, this is more work for you but basing your decision off something like this is more accurate than having someone hack at something that isn't expected to work anyway.

Senior team members should be able to design a solution, present the design and explain it and defend any decisions if needed, or adapt any decisions based on feed back and communicate the plan to junior members of the team and explain it in a mentoring way.

This human interaction is more important than having them partially complete an entry level busy work assignment. Which most will not want to do; if they do it at all and if presented with an offer afterwards, will probably refuse as it is a demeaning task.

There are lots of senior cowboy coders that have no personal skills and don't work in a team at all, a contrived test that you propose will not weed these people out, and trust me you don't want a single one of these type of people on a team of any size!

I would worry more about how they approach the solution than the mechanical part of the solution ( the code ), and how they communicate their solution. This is why whiteboards exist.

If you provide them with a base set of requirements and the first thing they don't do is start asking for specifics, then that is a strike. You should have a specific set of things you want to hear them say or ask before hand, this is more work for you but basing your decision off something like this is more accurate than having someone hack at something that isn't expected to work anyway.

Senior team members should be able to design a solution, present the design and explain it and defend any decisions if needed, or adapt any decisions based on feed back.

This human interaction is more important than having them partially complete an entry level busy work assignment. Which most will not want to do; if they do it at all and if presented with an offer afterwards, will probably refuse as it is a demeaning task.

It should be assumed that their resume shows that they can code, otherwise why would you be interviewing them? If you can't see that they code don't bring them in, you are wasting your time.

That said, I would worry more about how they approach the solution than the mechanical part of the solution ( the code ), and how they communicate their solution. This is why whiteboards exist.

If you provide them with a base set of requirements and the first thing they don't do is start asking for specifics, then that is a strike. You should have a specific set of things you want to hear them say or ask before hand, this is more work for you but basing your decision off something like this is more accurate than having someone hack at something that isn't expected to work anyway.

Senior team members should be able to design a solution, present the design and explain it and defend any decisions if needed, or adapt any decisions based on feed back and communicate the plan to junior members of the team and explain it in a mentoring way.

This human interaction is more important than having them partially complete an entry level busy work assignment. Which most will not want to do; if they do it at all and if presented with an offer afterwards, will probably refuse as it is a demeaning task.

There are lots of senior cowboy coders that have no personal skills and don't work in a team at all, a contrived test that you propose will not weed these people out, and trust me you don't want a single one of these type of people on a team of any size!

1
source | link

I would worry more about how they approach the solution than the mechanical part of the solution ( the code ), and how they communicate their solution. This is why whiteboards exist.

If you provide them with a base set of requirements and the first thing they don't do is start asking for specifics, then that is a strike. You should have a specific set of things you want to hear them say or ask before hand, this is more work for you but basing your decision off something like this is more accurate than having someone hack at something that isn't expected to work anyway.

Senior team members should be able to design a solution, present the design and explain it and defend any decisions if needed, or adapt any decisions based on feed back.

This human interaction is more important than having them partially complete an entry level busy work assignment. Which most will not want to do; if they do it at all and if presented with an offer afterwards, will probably refuse as it is a demeaning task.