If you're only applying to one job and you get it, sure. But when you're looking for a new job and sending out dozens of resumes, it adds up pretty quickly! On top of that, it makes rejections all the more dispiriting when you spend hours or days working on one job application.
One that hit me hard was a homework assignment that I absolutely aced. It was timed and I was super proud of myself for not only getting all of it completed including the bonus questions with what I considered very good quality code.
But I hadn't talked to anyone in the company prior to them giving me the homework. So they are impressed and move me on to the next stage, I talk with them and immediately find out that 60+ hour weeks are the normal for them several months out of the year. So my time on the coding exercise was wasted, a simple phone screening where they gave me details of the position would've saved me from that and I now insist on a quick chat with the hiring manager to "find out if I'm right for the role" prior to completing a non-trivial exercise.
IMHO, if you can't land, say, 1 out of 3 interviews, there is a systemic personal problem, not just a bad day, and "the problem is u" -- sadly you will just need to work harder because something in your skill set is not up to snuff.
Thanks for clarifying that your opinion was humble while insulting me. I was thinking of when I was getting my first job out of school, when I did three final interviews and landed one. The thing with the homework is that it typically comes well before the final interview and often even a phone interview. Often it would be the very first step in the process. I only had one application require a substantial (say, 4+ hours) amount of homework, but I had a lot more give 2 to 3 hour assignments.
That was annoying, but considering I was unemployed and job searching full-time, it was manageable. If it becomes more common, as seems to be happening, it'll absolutely become an issue for anyone who has to do more than a couple of job applications, which probably includes most people trying to move up in position or relocate.
My last job hunt (only a few months ago) I probably approached/applied to around 50 companies, got about 10 interviews and 1 offer. I don’t think that’s too far from most tech people’s job hunting experience in today’s environment. If you are getting 1 offer per 3 interviews, you might be “punching way below your weight class.”
This ratio depends on how ambitious you are on upgrading from your current position. Imagine arranging all open jobs into layers. At the lower layers are jobs that you can do with your eyes closed. Towards the middle are jobs you're sure you could do, but would take some ramping up. Higher up are jobs that might be more rewarding, and you think you have decent chance of doing them well if you work hard to improve your skills once you're in.
Your 1:3 odds will be different depending on your target. Maybe the commenter to whom you replied is trying to get jobs paying 50% more than their current job, but for each of these jobs there's only a 3% chance of getting it.
Fair enough. I wrote my comment assuming lateral or slightly upward movement, not a level skip, which I personally would never try to do between jobs, unless it was moving from a little fish in a big pond to a big fish in a little pond type situation.
I agreed with your main post, but landing 1 out of 3 interviews? I know several people who got offers at both Facebook and Google out of school who did not hit a 1 out of 3 ratio of offers to interviews
Ok. It was a SWAG. My point being that a systemic failure to land a coding job is a problem with you, not the interview process(es).
My sentiment in my original reply is that I hear a lot of complaining about "i was asked to code binary search" interviews, which seems to come with an implicit but unstated "...and i failed to code binary search, therefore it is bullshit" statement attached to it. Somehow I feel like if it ended with "and I coded binary search because I can generally code on-demand or because I specifically practiced it, and I got the job!" -- like there would be less complaining happening...
I mean, people don't wanna do whiteboard coding ("it's not realistic"), they don't wanna do take-home coding ("it's too much work") ... are people willing to do ANYTHING to get a dev job?
I've seen a situation where the person literally refused to do an interview, just stated their desired comp, take it or leave it. Are you fucking kidding me?
> My point being that a systemic failure to land a coding job is a problem with you, not the interview process(es).
The statistics on this speak a far different truth - one where most of the time, you're going to get rejected no matter how good you are, because you're competing with hundreds of other candidates for one position.
