This was very good.

That’s great question. I see the problem a little differently. I see the problem as needing to increase the effectiveness, efficiency and fairness of recruiting. Reading resumes has a very low success rate, is highly bias but only takes a couple minutes per applicant. Blind performance auditions on the other hand has a high success rate, reduces a lot of bias and takes a little more time but there’s much less volume to sort through.

The time that we do spend sourcing is mostly outreach or just posting the job. We’ll talk with bootcamps, non-profits and colleges to evangelize why someone would want to work at our company. Public speaking events and hosting meet ups also help.

We don’t restrict or screen anyone from taking the test. We set clear expectations up front. Those who don’t feel they can cut it won’t spend the 2 hours. Also since we don’t have a dedicated proctor for the test we reduce a huge amount of cost on the company’s side. This allows us to scale it better so we can spend time reviewing more candidates. The code review only takes about 5 to 10 minutes of an engineer’s time but we get a much clearer signal about a candidate’s aptitude.

The first company I did this at we just had the exam as an auto-response for an email address. The job posting had one email address for questions and another that they could take the exam anytime, day or night, as long as they had 2 consecutive hours to spend. We promised to get back to them before the end of the next business day. If we had too many candidates or the job was filled we’d just take down the posting.

Like what you read? Give Bobby Schultz a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.