Why Are Tech Interviews So Tough? Let's Talk About the Dreaded Tech Test

Interviews — they’re no one’s idea of fun. You’ve spent hours perfecting your CV and crafting that all-important cover letter. Finally, your efforts pay off, and you land the coveted first call with the recruiter. 

During that initial chat, the recruiter will likely give you a rundown of the team structure, the skills they’re after, and the company culture. Everything sounds great, and with a burst of enthusiasm, they cheerfully say, “We’d like to move forward to the next stage of interviews!” Thrilled, you would ask, “Fantastic! What does the recruitment process involve? What are the next steps?”

As they explain,  it would be typically 3-8 rounds of interview (yes that’s right), and with the same enthusiasm they inform you, “Oh, and there’s a tech test. Nothing too major, though! You’ll be done in about an hour, and we can move things along as quickly as you like.” You listen in disbelief, trying to wrap your head around the number of hoops you’ll need to jump through — but of course, you nod and agree. After all, you need the job.

Sound familiar? For those of us who’ve been in the tech industry a while, it probably does. But just because we’ve all experienced it doesn’t make it any less frustrating. Ask around, and you’ll find plenty of colleagues who’ll tell you, “That’s just the way it is.” And, they’re not exactly wrong. Employers need to assess your technical skills somehow, right?

Having spent over a decade on both sides of the table — as a candidate and as an interviewer — I’ve seen a growing trend: candidates dropping out as soon as they hear about the tech test. It’s understandable, really. But here’s the thing: while it’s true that tech tests are here to stay, there’s a smart way to navigate them. Let’s explore why this happens and what both candidates and employers can do better.

The Candidate’s Perspective

From a candidate’s point of view, these tests can be a real headache. They often require a significant amount of time to complete, with a barrage of questions that may seem more academic than practical. And let’s be honest: if there are more than five questions on the test, it’s probably going to take longer than the promised hour. This is time, candidates are not compensated for — time that eats into their personal lives. 

So, here’s a thought: does the candidate really need to know the answer to every question from day one? Does mastering these skills directly impact their daily tasks? If the answer is “No,” to both, then why are those questions even on the test?

The Employer’s Challenge

From an employer’s perspective, hiring is no easy task, particularly for multidisciplinary tech roles. Interviewers have to set aside personal biases, clear time in their hectic schedules, and make rightful judgments about cultural fit, soft skills, and technical abilities—all in about 60 to 90 minutes.

Over the years, I’ve met many hiring managers with varying views on these tests. But what’s becoming clearer is that managers who genuinely care about hiring candidates, who in turn can solve real problems and thrive in their roles, often find these async tech tests burdensome. As one engineering manager recently admitted to me, “I really resent reviewing these tests—it’s the worst part of my job.”

The Case for Live Interviews and Pair Programming

Live interviews or pair programming sessions can offer a far better assessment of a candidate’s abilities. In STEM roles, the ability to handle ambiguity and ask the right questions is a crucial skill. But that nuance is lost in a take-home test. Here’s a reality check: candidates won’t be emailing a future employer asking, “What did you mean by line 30?” while solving a take home assignment.

One more note, candidates have started using AI tools like ChatGPT to speed up the process ( candidates please stop doing that, we can tell when you’ve used it), so think again before going down that route.

Live sessions allow candidates to demonstrate their problem-solving skills in real time: did they ask follow-up questions? Did they think of edge cases? Did they consider multiple dimensions? Points for all of these!

If you’re not comfortable with live interviews, then a coding platform is the best alternative. The candidates can see if the code compiles, and since these tests are timed, cheating isn’t easy.

Candidates, a piece of advice, make sure you’ve had an interview with the hiring manager before agreeing to any technical test. You need to be sure you’re genuinely interested in the role, the company’s mission, and the culture. If the process doesn’t follow that order, don’t be afraid to ask for it to be rearranged. Any employer who is serious about hiring and attracting the best candidates would be more than happy to comply. If they refuse? Well, that might be a sign to reconsider whether it’s worth your time — and your sanity.

Designing a Live Tech Test Interview

This choice certainly isn’t easy, but it gives the hiring manager the chance to evaluate the candidate’s skills as a whole: critical thinking, problem-solving, mathematical and statistical modelling, adaptability, and presentation skills, to name a few. A practical way to prepare for these interviews is to choose high-level, broad questions that allow follow-up questions and uncover the skills needed to perform the job.

It takes time, you say, but you also have an important mission. In today’s ‘hire slow, fire fast’ culture, make sure you get the right fit—whether it’s skills, culture, or presentation.

When designing a test, keep in mind the skill you are trying to  asses— whether it is speed, optimised code, or the correct solution—and stick to it. 

Don’t forget to allow time for a candidate to think and let them develop their thoughts. Some candidates get too nervous during interviews, so it’s not a bad idea to ease them in with different sets of questions before diving into the live interview. If you suspect a candidate is using AI, politely ask them to turn it off.

And What About Those Coding Platforms?

Coding platforms like HackerRank, Codility and the likes, may feel like a less painful alternative to take-home tests. They help gauge a candidate’s coding abilities or familiarity with certain tools. These platforms can focus heavily on algorithms and are great for very technical roles. They’re not without their flaws, though, and they can often lack context or fail to provide a comprehensive picture of a candidate’s skill set.

Final Thoughts

So, what’s the takeaway here? If you’re a candidate, be strategic. Ensure you understand the role and the team’s mission before committing to a tech test. If you’re an employer, consider whether your choice of tech test is really helping you find the best talent or if they’re just adding another layer of hurdles. Should you need advice for the tech interviews or support to create one, reach out to our career lab, we would love to hear from you!