Not all roles at companies require coding tests, or even tests for that matter - so its a form of discrimination. Did the ceo of the company go through a test before they were hired to manage the company? Secondly, most interviews start with introductions where candidates share their background. So, after that if you go into a coding test, what you are doing is essentially discrediting a candidate's cv/resume, skills, experience, and education background. Not a good start at building a relationship from distrust. It also showcases how the company might treat the candidate, if they were to transition into an employee. Coding interviews can also be quite opinionated, biased, frustrating, flawed, outdated, bookish, pedantic, use buggy third-party tools, unclear instructions, and unrelated to the job. Plus, you can't really correct the interviewer during the process with best practices and the way they do things. Another aspect is it is chargeable time, the interviewer could get a free lunch without having to pay and hire you. By the time you set them through all those test stages they could have an offer with someone else. Likely, the candidate has already gone through tests at uni and most of their life, do you really want to bore them with more tests to do.
- They eat a significant part of an interview process
- They take time to do
- Often the instructions are not clear and there is no one to ask for help
- There is a chance that the organization could get a free lunch without the need to pay and hire the candidate
- There is a chance that the organization could ghost on the candidate straight after
- Doesn't accurately compare candidates
- Other roles do not require such tests
- Candidates can lose interest
- Then there is the aspect of human bias
- Test markers could be too pedantic e.g. marking down for spelling a variable either in American or British english
- Often the test is unrelated to the job e.g. asking someone to do a spring test when the job description does not even require that experience
- The test provides incorrect instructions
- The tests can be biased and discriminatory
- Often tests don't reflect the real-world
- Often tests are too bookish and an indication of how junior the role is
- People go through university and school taking tests, do you really have to then give them more tests during interview
- It is a perfect way to put off a candidate
- It can be seen as a form of insult to the candidate
- If you require tests then why do you need them to have a bachelor's, master's, or a phd
- Giving someone a test to do is in a way discrediting all the skills, education, and experience they have on the CV/Resume. Not a good way of building a relationship from distrust.
- It can be seen as a form of discrimination, especially as not all roles require tests, or even the same types of tests
- Coding interviewers can be quite opinionated and not necessarily correct in their best practices
- Correcting a coding interviewer during an interview can be tricky
- It can be frustrating for candidates as the coding interviewer has their own way of doing things
- It showcases how the potential employer will distrust and treat the candidate as they transition into an employee
- Coding tests can be outdated or use third-party tools that are buggy
- And, when the third-party testing tool gives you the message "system is down for maintenance" right in middle of a session
