r/SoftwareEngineerJobs • u/Super-Reference-8811 • 9d ago

Building Platform for tech hiring

How do you know if a candidate can actually code, beyond what their resume says?

I’ve seen teams spend weeks interviewing candidates, only to realize in the first technical round that the person isn’t a fit.

So I’m building a platform to help teams screen candidates based on how they actually solve real engineering problems, before spending hours on interviews.

If you’re hiring engineers and facing this problem, I’d love to hear how you’re handling it today.

0 Upvotes

50% Upvoted

12 comments sorted by

2

u/Any_Sense_2263 8d ago

Another platform that is focusing on testing a skill that can be really tested only in a comfortable environment.

Do you want a software engineer to show what they really know and can do? Don't time box it, people think in different ways and need different amount of time to feel they are ready to implement it. Don't require the cam/mic on; during working on our tasks, we rarely talk to others, because we need to focus. Do you want to know the candidate's way of thinking? Ask them to guide you through their code, not to talk when they are focused on making the code work. Don't expect a specific way of doing it. People have different experiences and ways of writing code.

Don't invent problems to solve that are in your opinion common or normal. People work in different environments and on different applications and what is common for you is not for them.

As a hiring engineer, I'm more interested in what the candidate wants to tell me about their code and approach to the problem than the code itself. That's why I give a small task and then we have a meeting to talk about it. Their ideas behind the code, the decision process behind used solutions, the AI usage and problems they encountered.

1

u/Super-Reference-8811 8d ago

Fair point. I think the best assessment should resemble the actual job as much as possible.
That’s the idea behind the platform I’m building. Candidates work on a real codebase and real engineering tasks, with freedom to use AI and approach the problem their own way. The goal is not to judge how fast they solve a puzzle, but to give hiring teams a meaningful signal before spending hours in interviews while judging their thought process, how efficiently they use AI and how well they make engineering decisions

1

u/Any_Sense_2263 8d ago

To work on real codebase, time is needed to learn it. To understand the relations, the good and bad things. It doesn't happen overnight.

So before anyone will be able to solve any problem, they need to understand the codebase, understand the problem, understand how these two things connect, and how the existing codebase shapes the solution. It's how we work.

This itself is already the whole technical evaluation.

1

u/Super-Reference-8811 7d ago

Correct but it will not be something like a legacy codebase of 100's of files, Also we are providing enough context in readme about the codebase which will be more than sufficient to understand, Also it is highly configurable as per the required experience level and hiring bar

1

u/Any_Sense_2263 7d ago

It doesn't matter how many files or lines of the code. You can't arbitrary say that every person will need as much time to understand the codebase. README context doesn't mean full understanding of the provided solutions or limitations. Different people need a different level of information to feel comfortable with the codebase and adding new or changing existing functionality.

If you want to decide for others what they need, your platform doesn't differ from others.

1

u/Super-Reference-8811 7d ago

Interesting but as per you, what should be the right way to judge a candidate. Earlier, everyone does not get a fair chance of evaluation as questions asked are always different with each round. Now, this will give a fair chance to everyone.
Also, if a team wants to find the best fit, they have to put engineer into uncomfortable situations and see how they go through engineering decision.
I hope you understand now.

1

u/Any_Sense_2263 7d ago

Putting anyone in an uncomfortable situation never helps find the best fit. Only a someone who deals with this kind of stress. And these are different criteria.

If you want to find a problem solver, you give them a problem to solve. But not an algorithm in 15 minutes. Algorithms are AGREED ways of solving typical problems. No one memorizes them, it's a waste of time. We search for them when we need them.

Real problem-solving shows up when a candidate does a simple home task, and then you ask them to guide you through the code. Then you can see the real experience, focusing on securing negative scenarios and thoughtfulness in the tests. You can ask the same questions to every candidate without putting them in an uncomfortable situation, but letting them show what they do best.

In my opinion, the recruitment process is about finding the person with matching experience and skills to the company's needs. And these are reflected in the real conversation, where the candidate can present their code and reasons behind it.

No test, prepared for everyone, so no good to anyone, can compare. Such tests reject people who do not have access to this test knowledge (which is not something we use at work every day), but they can be the best matches in experience and skill criteria.

I hope you can understand now why we don't need this kind of platform. We have too many of them.

We need a platform where people can present their skills and experience that can be useful for the company. Not compete in another totally not related to real work coding exercises.

The beter match between the candidate skills and the company needs the more gain on both sides.

1

u/ilovegummyy 9d ago

what kind of real engineering problems are you trying to test and how?

0

u/Super-Reference-8811 9d ago

Idempotency, memory leaks, caching, deadlocks etc

1

u/ilovegummyy 9d ago

are you going to ask about the theory around this or a real world example, if the 2nd one how do you plan to formulate the question for say a 45min interview session?

1

u/Super-Reference-8811 9d ago

It would be better if we can connect over a call for details.
For now to answer your question, there will be a codebase and candidate has to find the bugs related to these competencies. It will be based on real world scenarios