Whiteboard coding tests are disliked by many engineers, including one of the creators of Django, an architecture lead at Stack Overflow and David Heinemeier Hansson, the creator of Ruby on Rails.
“I would fail to write bubble sort on a whiteboard. I look up code on the internet all the time. I don’t do riddles,” Hansson wrote in an infamous 2017 tweet.
Whiteboarding often puts significant stress on candidates, requiring them to memorize obscure syntax that doesn’t actually show their approach to problem-solving. Havish Vinnakota — a VP of engineering with nearly a decade of leadership experience — is so focused on the idea of candidate comfort, he and his team at cybersecurity company Automox did away with whiteboarding altogether. Instead, they replaced the practice with a cooperative pair-programming exercise that’s more casual and conversational.
Vinnakota’s team recently made yet another pivot to their hiring practices: they transitioned to remote interviews via Zoom due to the coronavirus pandemic. Though Automox was forced to make this adjustment, Vinnakota said they’ve seen unexpected benefits.
“We have noticed that the virtual atmosphere is more relaxed and informal,” Vinnakota said. “Candidates are typically at home, well-rested and in a space that is more comfortable to them.”
What tools do you use to conduct coding tests virtually?
Our interview strategy aims to take a practical and non-traditional approach, one where empathy is the underpinning of the entire process. So we eliminated whiteboard coding tests and replaced them with a series of conversations, combined with a collaborative pair-programming experience. Fortunately, I believe this structure inadvertently prepared us to switch from in-person to fully virtual interviewing fairly quickly, without compromising the integrity of our goals.
From a technology standpoint, we utilize Zoom widely across the company and leverage its whiteboard feature for a Pictionary-style experience. This tool enables our engineers to discuss and solve technical problems with a candidate in a highly interactive and collaborative manner. The benefits of this feature extend beyond interviewing; it allows us to perform code reviews, design discussions and brainstorming sessions.
The virtual atmosphere is more relaxed and informal.”
How do you adapt the format or content of these types of interviews when conducting them virtually?
The biggest adjustment for us has been calibrating our own expectations in this new normal of virtual interviewing. One of the key differences between in-person and virtual interviews is the atmosphere. There is no longer a handshake to start off, and the ability to read body language is far more challenging when someone is sharing their screen via Zoom.
At the same time, we have noticed that the virtual atmosphere is more relaxed and informal. Candidates are typically at home, well-rested and in a space that is more comfortable to them. Another area of adaptation we have seen is how people present themselves. When interviewing in-person at an office, candidates dress to impress and are a bit more formal in their interactions with the team. Interviewees are coming into a team’s space and want to meet their expectations. Presentation is more informal when interviewing virtually. We see a candidate’s home office, they may be wearing a hoodie, and we may even meet a family member or pet if we’re lucky.
What’s your best piece of advice for engineering leaders tasked with handling technical interviews virtually?
We’re all currently going through a series of experiences where nothing is normal or typical. There is no playbook for any of this, so we as leaders need to accept the new reality that in-person experiences just can’t be replicated in a virtual setting. So instead of trying to fight it, let’s embrace the new normal and use this as a forcing function to optimize an online experience that is potentially just as good — if not better — than a physical one.
