Code Poets

Live coding part 1 ..and how HR Manager Joanna Diaków sees it.

Some time ago, we made a vote on the topic of live coding. You had a chance to decide if you liked it or not. Our answer is quite simple - we like it ✅

Why this topic?
We have been getting information from some developers that they are unhappy they must participate in this part of the recruitment process. The most significant pain point for them is stress.

Is it that stressful, though?

The rules of live coding in Code Poets
1️⃣ At the meeting, there is one representative (mostly, it's a senior software developer) and the candidate.
2️⃣ The candidate receives information that live coding is independent of the technology, and the only thing he needs to have prepared is the web environment.
3️⃣ The candidate knows he will have an hour to solve the task on screen sharing and half an hour for technical conversation.

*We try not to give too many tips before live coding. We want to reflect the actual skills of the candidate.
**Did you know there is a rule not to look at the documentation on some live coding sessions? There is no such thing during our meetings.

What do developers think about live coding?
We always send candidates a post-recruitment satisfaction survey and ask: "What is the best way, in your opinion, to verify the candidate's technical skills."

➡️ 66% - a technical task to be solved at home,
➡️ 49% - conversation with a developer,
➡️ 40% - live coding.

The question is multiple-choice. The data comes from our survey in 2022; 36 candidates participated in the survey.

So why live coding? Why not some assessments?
For a long time in our company, technical skills have been verified through homework. After the HR screening, HR sent the candidate a technical task. We gave the candidates a week to solve the task. However, the candidates repeatedly asked us to extend the deadline or resigned from the process, explaining that it was too time-consuming. Some immediately gave up the process, explaining that they did not want to spend time after work on the recruitment task.

This led us to the conclusion that we need to change something. Our process took too long, and many competent candidates dropped out just at the beginning of the process. In 2022 the average length of the recruitment process with homework was 24 days.

👉 By changing the technical task to live coding, we saved 9 calendar days. We wanted to reduce the time of the recruitment process because our role is to provide our client with the best possible candidate quickly. I am happy to say we succeed, so our live coding is effective. In the end, with our mentors, live coding is not such a stressful experience; however, from our point of view, it's essential to stay with it because its effectiveness it's a value for the client.

What do you feel about live coding?