> The benefit of the coding puzzle platforms is as a hiring firm you get shown data about all applicants who took that test, and it’s standardised.
You're arguing that standardized testing is a good indicator of candidate outcome. If this was the case, Universities would not be ditching the SATs en masse.
When you test for programming puzzles, you're just filtering out people who have grinded leetcode, just like how the SATs filtered out people who took SAT prep classes. If that's your goal, great. However, we shouldn't pretend programming puzzles are a good way to filter for great engineers. I can guarantee you that leetcode is filtering out a lot of great engineers.
Universities are ditching the SAT en masse because it is an excellent predictor of outcome, and that is interfering with affirmative action political objectives (much easier to get away with racially discriminating against more-qualified Asian applicants if you can deny knowing they were more qualified).
My goal in running a team is performance rather than political signalling, so I prefer to use the best performance metrics available to me.
You're arguing that standardized testing is a good indicator of candidate outcome. If this was the case, Universities would not be ditching the SATs en masse.
When you test for programming puzzles, you're just filtering out people who have grinded leetcode, just like how the SATs filtered out people who took SAT prep classes. If that's your goal, great. However, we shouldn't pretend programming puzzles are a good way to filter for great engineers. I can guarantee you that leetcode is filtering out a lot of great engineers.