The Pros and Cons of Live Coding Interviews: A FrontEnd Dev Analysis
Tags: webdev, discuss, career, javascript
Published: 2023-03-29 23:50:47

Live coding interviews have become a widely-used method for evaluating software developers in recent years. While this approach has its advantages, it also has its limitations and drawbacks that need to be considered. In this article, we shall delve deeper into the technical aspects of live coding interviews and examine both their merits and limitations.

**Let's discuss the PROS**

![The Pros](https://dev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/articles/vxiv0apg8t2t7xu19qxd.gif)

## Single Path of Prep
One advantage of live coding interviews is that they offer a single path of preparation that covers many companies with a standard recruiting process. Candidates can prepare for live coding interviews by practicing on platforms like [LeetCode](https://leetcode.com/) and focusing on system design principles. This can save candidates time and effort, as they can apply to multiple companies with similar interview formats.

## Equal Evaluation
These type of interviews are easier to evaluate for interviewers, as they are definitive in their ways of problems and answers. Other formats of interviews can be opinionated and may not be as easy to evaluate. While nothing is 100% fair, this approach seems to be more consistent.

## Interview Time
These type of interviews are significantly shorter compared to other formats like take-home projects or demo days with the team. This can be a significant advantage for candidates, as they can complete interviews at multiple companies more quickly and maintain negotiating power throughout the process.

## Compensation
Many high-compensation companies have a common format of interview based on LeetCode and system design stages. This means that, for candidates who aspire to work for these top-paying companies, live coding interviews are a necessary investment in their career development. Even if candidates do not agree with the process, they may need to see it as a way to achieve greater compensation later on.

**Now for the CONS...**

![Cons](https://dev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/articles/7znlxmv6yiytm76vqyoi.gif)

## Limited Scope
Live coding interviews may not be suitable for mid-senior roles, as these positions often require more nuanced skills that cannot be evaluated through coding alone. For example, roles that require team management or strategic planning may not be well-suited for live coding interviews. In these cases, companies may need to consider other evaluation methods.

## Subjective Evaluation
One of the major issues with live coding interviews is that they can be subjective. Without a clear grading mechanism, the interview process may be open to interpretation, and the interviewer may move the goalposts. This can create biases against candidates who do not fit the interviewer's expectations or preferences.


## Comfortability
Not all candidates may be comfortable with live coding interviews, which can create biases against non-CS graduates. Candidates who did not study computer science may have less experience with live coding interviews and may be at a disadvantage compared to their peers. This can create an unequal playing field in the job market.


## Overall Thoughts
Companies should consider finding more innovative approaches to interviewing developers, such as take-home projects or demo days with the team. By doing so, they can ensure that they are evaluating candidates based on their unique skill sets, rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach that may not be the best fit for everyone.

Instead of simulating a working environment for candidates, it would be more advantageous to offer them an authentic, real-world work experience. While it may not be practically feasible to extend an invitation to candidates to work alongside the team for an entire week on live projects, organizations can opt to host assessment days or hackathons to offer candidates a meaningful, hands-on experience.

This approach holds several benefits over traditional interview methods. Firstly, it provides candidates with a concrete understanding of the work environment, team dynamics, as well as the specific tasks and challenges of the role. This heightened level of transparency enables candidates to make a more informed decision regarding their fit within the organization.

There are many articles written about this very topic and it changes every year, as it should, but I think it should be innovated. 


What are your thoughts?