Make talent quality your leading analytic with skills-based hiring solution.
Ever wondered why you can’t attract or retain the best talent even after what felt like a strong coding interview? The problem often isn’t the candidates, it’s the coding tests themselves. Recruitment is competitive, and the more effective your process is, the better your chances of attracting and keeping strong candidates. Most technical hiring processes rely on coding tests to evaluate programming ability and narrow down candidates for further interviews, but not all coding tests actually measure what they claim to.
As competition for strong software talent has grown, so has the need for reliable skill assessments. Coding tests exist to evaluate programmers directly, rather than relying on a resume alone. But when a test is built around the wrong things, it can look rigorous while actually measuring very little about real job performance. Coding tests offer several real advantages when built well.
Skills evaluation. A well built coding test helps predict future job performance by examining a candidate’s problem solving skills, not just their ability to memorize syntax.
Cost efficiency. Online coding tests let organizations evaluate candidates from anywhere in the world without the overhead of in person technical screens, reducing recruitment costs.
Better selection. Coding tests help recruiters identify genuinely qualified candidates and screen out those who look strong on paper but can’t perform the actual work.
Reduced bias. Tests evaluated through consistent, automated scoring reduce the human bias that can creep into subjective technical interviews.
As one hiring leader put it:
“While we do use a coding test, we place more emphasis on the actual interview. A person can pass your assessment in the fastest time with 100%, but still not be a good fit for your company. A developer needs to blend in well with the team and have business soft skills, as well as being good at coding.” — David Galownia, CEO, Slingshot
Many coding tests are built to examine technical knowledge rather than a candidate’s actual capability and ability to learn. A few common problems show up again and again.
They test memorized skills, not real capability. Candidates often spend weeks preparing for algorithm heavy tests, which rewards test taking practice over genuine problem solving ability. Algorithmic skill alone doesn’t define a good developer; the ability to understand a problem and improvise matters just as much.
They take too much time. A test that runs 60 minutes, taken three times a week over a month, adds up to days of unpaid work for a candidate. Longer tests tend to produce lower completion rates and can cause strong candidates to underperform simply due to fatigue.
As one expert on technical hiring notes:
“It’s very important to watch how [a developer] codes, and how [a developer] is thinking about the problem.” — Daniel Alcanja
They run in unfamiliar conditions. Developers tend to perform best in their own customized environment. An unfamiliar test setup can make even a strong candidate look weaker than they are.
Coding tests shouldn’t be skipped outright, but they do need to be designed well. Resume screening alone isn’t a reliable substitute, since many developers aren’t skilled at writing resumes, and screening by resume alone only shows a partial picture of past experience while introducing its own bias. Some form of skills evaluation remains necessary, but it needs to be relevant, well scoped and fair.
A coding test is working well when it meets a few key criteria:
As one hiring expert explains:
“Assessments should be actual exercises related to real work and problems (not actual work though) and should be later in the process when you have both invested time. The biggest problem is many companies give assessments that are NOT focused on real business problems and instead ask serious coders to on the spot right some algorithm function that is generally not used in the real world or to do exercises like Big O. On the flip side they go to simple and pull from a common set of questions that coders can easily study for.” — Pieter VanIperen, Founder, PWV Consultants
Should coding tests be replaced with resume screening instead?
No. Resume screening alone tends to introduce more bias and gives only a partial view of a candidate’s actual ability, since resumes aren’t always a reliable signal of real skill.
How long should a good coding test take?
Most well designed coding tests run between 45 and 60 minutes. Longer tests tend to lower completion rates and can cause fatigue that hurts candidate performance.
What’s the biggest sign a coding test isn’t working?
A low completion rate or negative candidate feedback is usually the clearest signal that a test is too long, too abstract, or disconnected from the actual job.
With Glider, you can analyze a candidate’s skill level, personality traits and cultural fit through holistic, interactive assessments and real world simulations. Choose from pre built tests or create your own using more than 30 question types, including video assessments, and evaluate programming skills across more than 40 programming languages. You can code collaboratively with candidates using pre built, standardized, auto scored coding tasks, keep test time within the ideal 45 to 60 minute window, and build a talent pool of top candidates using auto evaluated tests that require no manual scoring. Learn more about our skill assessment platform.
Technical skills assessments have become the foundation of modern engineering hiring. Yet just a few years ago, most technical hiring teams still relied heavily on resumes, recruiter screenings, and live whiteboard interviews to evaluate engineers. While common, these methods were often slow, inconsistent, and prone to favouring candidates who performed well in interviews rather than […]
Skills assessments are is often treated as a single step in the hiring process. In reality, they run through the entire hiring workflow. They appear in different forms depending on the hiring stage, the role being evaluated, and the level of hiring risk a team is willing to take. If you look at the broader […]
Why Skills Assessment Has Become a Hiring Priority Hiring teams are not struggling because they lack candidates. They are struggling because traditional hiring signals no longer predict performance reliably enough. A polished resume does not guarantee execution. Strong interview performance does not always translate into strong on-the-job performance. And as hiring volumes grow, these gaps […]
