I suspect the technical interview devolves into an act of shunting the blame of potential bad hires away at some places. Elite credentials and leetcode shibboleths serve the same purpose: this person has checked the boxes we've agreed upon as important in the hiring process, regardless of the job duties. If they turn out to be a bad hire, who could've known, esp. with that Ivy League bachelor's degree?
It's less the tree operations themselves and more that this candidate just didn't know the shibboleth, so they shouldn't be allowed in. Cue the vague feeling of disgust on the interviewer's part that the interviewee didn't know something "so simple" in a tense environment with lopsided power dynamics.
>shibboleth
Fantastic word right there, had to look it up.
That's exactly how I'd describe the hiring process these days. Relevant expertise seems like its only seen as a bonus. That or I'm interviewing at some terrible companies.
The role of such standardized coding interviews is to ensure consistency when hiring at very large scale. Some big tech companies hire thousands of people a year, and interview ten times that.
Candidates have a very diverse set of backgrounds, age, experience, culture, education, interests, experience. The coding interview is a common denominator: undergrad algorithmic knowledge, being able to solve problems which are application of classic algorithms. This is something that a decent coder should be able to prepare for within a few months of regular practice. In my case, I can tell that these months of practice were the best investment in my life. And honestly, I feel I'm a better programmer after this preparation.
> Cue the vague feeling of disgust on the interviewer's part that the interviewee didn't know something "so simple" in a tense environment with lopsided power dynamics.
This is your interpretation of the situation. As an interviewer, I want the interviewee to succeed, I understand it's stressful for them as I've been in their shoes before.
Ultimately, there are more candidates than positions, so whatever the interview is, people will complain about it. I think leetcode is a decent interview technique. I wish we would give more time to candidates though.
It's less the tree operations themselves and more that this candidate just didn't know the shibboleth, so they shouldn't be allowed in. Cue the vague feeling of disgust on the interviewer's part that the interviewee didn't know something "so simple" in a tense environment with lopsided power dynamics.