Clarify

Author: john-kurkowski

src/content/posts/2025-04-03-still-measuring-devs-with-leetcode.mdx

@@ -55,9 +55,9 @@ well? What if a candidate was a great fit for the job, but the specialized
 simulacrum and pressure cooker of live-coding LeetCode interviews excluded such
 a candidate? I sought the advice of the posts at the beginning of this article.
 
-Improving the situation was and is easier said than done. Hiring developers is
-hard. My teams iterated for years to 1) structure our interviews—a structured
-interview is fairer but sadly not the friendliest candidate experience, for the
+Improving the situation was and is easier said than done. Hiring is hard. My
+teams iterated for years to 1) structure our interviews—a structured interview
+is fairer but sadly not the friendliest candidate experience, for the
 interviewer to read from a script _at_ the candidate—and 2) develop relevant,
 realistic, self-contained assessment projects. For take-home assessments, we
 didn't pay candidates for their time, which was tantamount to free labor and
@@ -67,22 +67,22 @@ pointed to their public contributions as evidence of their skill and
 collaboration style, and declined the take-home as something they couldn't
 afford. What were all their free labor OSS contributions for, after all? Our
 team didn't have the capacity to develop and maintain a "fair" backup
-measurement for the special case. While our take-home assessment was a promising
-hiring solution, we still could've done better.[^1]
+measurement for the special case. While our fairer structures and take-home
+assessment were promising for hiring, we still could've done better.[^1]
 
-I took a career break from tech the last couple years. When I started the tech
+The last couple years, I took a career break from tech. When I started the tech
 job hunt 12 months ago, wanting to try my old full stack web developer job in a
-new domain, I no longer had the power of a referral. I program every day. I know
-I can do the job. If an interviewer talks to me, I can demonstrate I know how to
-program, I'm emotionally intelligent, and that their team would want to work
-with someone friendly like me. Right?
+new domain, I no longer had the power of a referral. So I braced for interviews.
+I program every day. I know I can do the job. If an interviewer talks to me, I
+can demonstrate I know how to program, I'm emotionally intelligent, and that
+their team would want to work with someone friendly like me. Right?
 
 Much to my chagrin, I didn't make it far in the interview process, because
 almost every company I've interviewed with this year still uses LeetCode-style
 interviews. If a company even gives the heads up of what to expect in an
 interview, don't necessary believe, "Our live code assessment uses real-world
-problems." In 9/10 of my interviews this year, the interview was still LeetCode
-in a trenchcoat.
+problems." In 9/10 of my interviews this year, the technical step was still
+LeetCode in a trenchcoat.
 
 I was rusty at these live coding interviews, because in my 14 year career,
 LeetCode and what it teaches _never came up_ on the job. Software development is
@@ -115,9 +115,9 @@ puzzle close to the 1,000 they could be given. Other candidates use cheating
 software like Lee's. Meanwhile, experienced developers who could do the actual
 job well but haven't memorized these puzzles struggle to complete them under
 pressure. The unqualified candidate aces the test. The qualified candidate fails
-to finish in time, though they might explain what they _would_ do next, given
-more time. For your overloaded hiring pipeline, which candidate would you
-advance? The test ace or the struggling explainer?
+to finish in time, though they can explain what they _would_ do next, given more
+time. For your overloaded hiring pipeline, which candidate would you advance?
+The test ace or the struggling explainer?
 
 Lee answered whether he had ethical concerns about his product.
 
@@ -131,21 +131,21 @@ They have memorized 1,000s of such puzzles. If something is easily solvable by
 computers, maybe that's another hint it's not a great test of a software
 developer?
 
-I haven't subscribed to Lee's product. All I know is, I like using AI-assisted
+While I haven't subscribed to Lee's product, I know I like using AI-assisted
 coding in my normal job. It would be realistic to have normal tools available in
 an assessment.
 
 While the debate of allowed tools in an assessment rages on, to skip the debate
 next time I'm on the job hunt, I hope to cross-reference my applications with
 the [Hiring Without Whiteboards] list. Companies on the list don't make
 qualified devs jump through hoops with puzzles like LeetCode. The only reason I
-didn't use the list is the 2025 tech hiring market is very difficult.[^2] I felt
-beggars couldn't be choosers. So I unfortunately encountered a lot of companies
-that use LeetCode interviews.
+didn't use the list? The 2025 tech hiring market is very difficult.[^2] I felt
+beggars couldn't be choosers.
 
 I hope more companies think harder who they're looking for. They're missing out
-on qualified devs by following what's trendy. They're dehumanzing candidates. I
-hope to see the companies one day make the Hiring Without Whiteboards list.
+on qualified devs by following what's trendy. They're dehumanzing candidates.
+There are better ways to interview and measure. I hope to see the companies one
+day make the Hiring Without Whiteboards list.
 
 ### Footnotes