Make talent quality your leading analytic with skills-based hiring solution.
Hiring technical talent has never been more competitive, and resumes or multiple choice tests often fail to reveal whether a candidate can actually code under real world conditions. That is why more companies are turning to live coding interview software: platforms that let candidates write, run, and explain code in real time while an interviewer or an automated system observes and scores the session.
According to Glider’s own research, 76% of recruiters say traditional interviews don’t reliably measure coding ability, while 65% of hiring managers prefer live technical assessments because they mirror the work a candidate would actually do on the job. Live coding sessions bring clarity to the hiring process by showing what a candidate can do in the moment, rather than relying on a resume or a take home assignment that could have been completed with outside help.
Live coding interview software is a platform that gives candidates a secure, browser based coding environment, complete with a compiler or interpreter, so they can solve problems while an interviewer watches and interacts in real time. Unlike a static take home test, a live session lets the interviewer ask follow up questions, watch the candidate’s problem solving process, and see how they respond to hints or changing requirements. Most platforms also record the session, generate a written report, and support dozens or hundreds of programming languages so the tool fits engineering, data, and QA roles alike.
The primary goal of a live coding interview is to assess how a candidate applies technical knowledge under real conditions, not just whether they can recite syntax.
A live coding interview follows a fairly consistent process across most platforms, including Glider:
The result is a process that is more transparent than a whiteboard interview and more revealing than a take home test, since it captures both the final answer and the thinking that got there.
Not all coding interview tools are built the same way, and the features below are worth checking closely before choosing one:
Glider AI’s live coding interview product is built around this exact list: a real world IDE covering 250+ languages and frameworks, pair programming mode, session replay, integrated AI proctoring, an AI assistant for candidates, and direct ATS integration for live coding sessions, paired with automated reports that highlight skill level and fit.
Both formats have a place in a hiring process, but they answer different questions. A take home test is useful for a first pass technical filter, since it lets a candidate work at their own pace without the pressure of being watched, but it cannot confirm who actually wrote the code or how the candidate thinks under real time pressure. A live coding interview answers exactly that gap: it confirms authorship, reveals the candidate’s reasoning process, and gives the interviewer a chance to probe further, which is why most hiring teams use a short take home screen followed by a live coding round rather than choosing only one format.
Live coding interviews aren’t just about screening out unqualified candidates, they’re about building real confidence in a hiring decision.
If you are evaluating live coding interview software for the first time, start by mapping the roles you hire for most often to the languages and frameworks those roles require, then confirm any platform you shortlist covers that list. From there, weigh how much of the process you want automated versus interviewer led: some teams want a fully proctored, self service flow for high volume roles, while others want a live, pair programming style session for senior engineering hires. Glider AI supports both models from the same platform, alongside broader skill assessment and AI proctoring tools if you need to extend testing beyond live coding sessions. For a wider look at how live coding fits alongside other interview formats, see Glider’s guide to choosing interview software.
Live coding interview software is a platform that gives candidates a secure, real time coding environment so they can solve problems while an interviewer or automated proctoring system observes, records, and scores the session.
They can be, but the stress is manageable with the right tool. Glider AI reduces pressure by using a familiar IDE, clear instructions, and an in session AI assistant that clarifies the task without giving away the answer.
Most platforms, including Glider, combine a secure coding environment with AI proctoring that flags plagiarism, impersonation, and other suspicious activity during the session, so integrity is maintained without manual monitoring.
Yes. They are most common for software developers, but the same format can be tailored for data scientists, QA engineers, and other technical roles that require hands on problem solving.
Most live coding interviews run between 30 and 60 minutes, long enough to complete one or two meaningful problems and leave time for follow up questions, without exhausting the candidate.
A take home assignment is completed independently and cannot confirm who wrote the code, while a live coding interview happens in real time with an interviewer present, confirming authorship and revealing the candidate’s actual problem solving process.
Hiring a construction architect isn’t just about reviewing a portfolio and checking if the designs look good. Anyone can put together something visually appealing. What you really need to understand is how they think. How they solve problems. How they handle constraints like budgets, timelines, clients, and site realities. Because on paper, everything works. On […]
Finding the right candidate starts long before the in-person interview. The Phone Screening Interview is often the first real opportunity to evaluate a candidate’s skills, experience, and fit for your team. Done well, it saves time, reduces bias, and ensures only qualified candidates move forward in the hiring process. Phone screening interviews have evolved from […]
When it comes to hiring, the interview is still the moment that makes or breaks a decision. But the way companies run interviews has hardly changed in decades—manual scheduling, inconsistent formats, and interviewer bias all create inefficiencies that slow down hiring and frustrate candidates. That’s why more organizations are turning to interview software to modernize […]
