I know of at least a couple instances where the person failed the code test and then (according to LinkedIn) got a solid job somewhere else.
Triplebyte actually has some hard data on this trend. Many candidates definitely bomb a few initial screens, do well on later screens, and then burn out and even withdraw from later on-sites. I imagine there’s high variance. Any experienced recruiter I’m sure has observed the same pattern... bombing one code test is typically not definitive.
>bombing one code test is typically not definitive
How many times would you say someone has to bomb Triplebyte (and/or similar) to make it “definitive”?
And after said number of failures what is it exactly that is “definitive”? What is the conclusion you would make? What is the conclusion that the candidate should make?
When I work with students, they're able to get _somewhere_ after several tries, even if they're tuned out for the first 5-7 times or so.
Definitive is a relative term. It's the point at which you give up. If you give up early, that might be a good thing or a bad thing for you. It's a choice you have to make yourself.
There's also the result that at Google they found hires who had one bad score typically outperformed others; the hypothesis was that there was somebody at Google who was willing to fight for them. Having a supportive manager / peer is IMO a much greater predictor of success than passing code tests.
Triplebyte has posted that onsites typically have a 20-30% pass rate. That means a totally average developer can expect to do 3-5 onsites per offer, and there can be significant variance in that number depending on any number of factors, including what the candidate ate for breakfast. There’s very little information conveyed by the number of technical interviews someone has failed.
