That's refreshing.
Just the other day I was asking at another HN thread how employed people are supposed to be going to full day interviews (sometimes in different states!). "take sick days". No, that's BS.
The only situation that I think it would be worthwhile is if both parties were as certain as they could be at that point that the candidate would be actually selected. Then it would make sense to give the applicant some actual work and allow they to sit with their likely future peers.
My memory may be failing me, but I seem to recall Joel Spolsky talking about doing this.
Yeah, agree with a lot of this. I've tried pretty hard to take the feedback I've seen on Hacker News and improve the hiring process for Data Scientists at my job–in particular, we make hire/no hire decisions based primarily on take-home assessments that are heavily based on our real work, have standardized our interview questions, invest time in answering applicants' questions early in the process, and try to minimize the number of onsite interviews.
It's a bit challenging–no matter what you do, someone is going to be unhappy with your interview process–but it seems to work much better than the default of asking a bunch of algorithmic questions on a whiteboard.
This is the kind of post that makes me want to apply to their company. Too bad they're in North Carolina and I'm in California.
You are a serious dumb fuck in denial.
Not sure what's so revolutionary here.
Seems the process is this:
1) Call with "CTO", who answers any questions about the company. Sounds like a standard phone screen.
2) Work sample, the company now wants you to prove you are worthy of talking to them again.
3) Another phone call, this time with "hiring manager" to discuss "compensation" - which I will presume means they will ask you how much you're currently making or expect to make. Do they divulge their salary bands first?
4) Onsite.
My assumption: once their team becomes bigger, the CTO call will be replaced by someone in HR and they will further standardize their process to the current market dynamics. And I still didn't read what was so revolutionary, maybe because they don't do "puzzles" and instead make you spend hours on "work samples"?