I'm curious what other folks are seeing in a post-AI hiring landscape and how you are approaching candidates that tell you they are fully agent-pilled when it comes to their development process. Should I keep doing the conventional leetcode and design interviews? Or just give up and expect everyone is going to use Claude Code no matter what?
I think that was a nice test, but the platform is too buggy to recommend.
Then 1-2 day paid work trial.
Interestingly…no one has said no to the trial.
It turns out that people want to derisk their decision just as much, if not more.
Still, it does benefit the hiring company, just not the applicant in these situations.
On the interview side, I have gone through a phase which required do an architectural design task on a whiteboard. I realized how stressful and not very helpful at evaluating it might be when I myself had to sit on the interviewee's side several times. It's difficult to get into this play-design mode.
Currently, I just make natural conversations, ask some technical questions on the level where I estimate the candidate is, try to understand the level of their knowledge and whether I would like to work with them in one team as a person. Maybe it wouldn't work for highly specialized roles, but for a general backend work I have been happy with the results.
You've reached the end!
Oras•2h ago
For your question, I assume you want people who can solve problems, can explain their thought process and reasons of decisions. I did interview devs recently, and my questions were related to their experience in their CV. Something like, tell me about project X in Y company, what did you do, what did you use, why, what did you learn from it.
My personal opinion is that LLMs are no difference from developers who over engineer and over complicate things. You can get them to do good work with the right steering and right understanding of the whole system within the context of the company.