Big Tech Needs to Rethink How It Recruits Experienced Professionals
Big tech’s one-size-fits-all approach alienates the very talent it seeks
Hi Everyone,
When I interviewed with Meta, after being repeatedly contacted by recruiters, the process included a “speed test” for solving coding problems. I declined further interviews. Read on….
On the surface, coding speed tests might seem like an efficient way to evaluate candidates, but as someone with a Ph.D. and significant experience, my question was: Is this really the best way to recruit senior talent? My experience mirrored that of my friend Yegor Bugayenko, whose post about Amazon’s recruiting process years ago remains painfully relevant today.
Big tech companies like Meta and Amazon are known for their cookie-cutter recruitment processes—standardized, efficient, and scalable. Here’s the problem, and it’s real: Big Tech systems often fail to respect or recognize the value of senior professionals and reduce them to rote problem-solving machines instead of engaging with the very qualities that set them apart. I specifically DON’T rush myself to solve an important problem. In fact, any problem that can be solved on an egg timer is a stupid problem. Does Meta want the other kind of problem solver? WTF? It’s dumb. Big Tech is becoming the “dumbification” of America. We have wonderful talent here. They don’t know how to recruit it. It saddens me.
Why Speed Tests Are Misaligned for Senior Candidates
For someone early in their career, coding challenges might be a reasonable proxy for skill. But for senior-level candidates, especially those with advanced degrees or years of leadership experience, they miss the point entirely. Here’s why:
They Prioritize Memorization Over Thoughtful Problem-Solving
A speed test focuses on quick recall of algorithms and syntax. But someone with deep expertise has spent years solving complex, thorny problems—real challenges that demand innovation, not just regurgitation.They Ignore Strategic Thinking
The kinds of roles senior candidates are recruited for often require leadership, vision, and the ability to architect solutions. Speed-coding challenges test none of these qualities.They Are Disconnected From Reality
Real-world coding rarely involves solving isolated puzzles under time constraints. Instead, it’s about understanding broader systems, collaborating with others, and designing scalable solutions. A speed test is, at best, a simulation of none of this.
The Lack of Respect for Seniority
A Ph.D. isn’t just a piece of paper—it represents years of tackling unsolved problems, synthesizing complex information, and producing original contributions to a field. Asking someone with that background to solve a timed coding problem feels reductive. It’s like asking a master chef to whip up instant ramen to prove they can cook.
Big tech’s recruitment processes often favor scalability over personalization. This makes sense when handling thousands of applications, but for highly experienced candidates, it can feel impersonal, even dismissive. The result? Companies risk alienating the very talent they’re trying to attract. I, for one, declined.
What Big Tech Should Do Instead
If companies like Meta or Amazon want to recruit senior talent effectively, their processes need to reflect the qualities they’re looking for. Here’s how they could improve:
Focus on Strategic Interviews
For senior candidates, the interview should center on high-level discussions: complex problems they’ve solved, innovations they’ve made, or how they approach system-level challenges.Engage With Real-World Problems
Instead of speed tests, ask candidates to critique an existing system, propose improvements, or solve a practical problem related to the company’s work. This would better demonstrate their ability to contribute meaningfully.Respect the Candidate’s Expertise
Tailor the process to reflect the candidate’s background and experience. A Ph.D. holder or someone with decades of experience doesn’t need to prove they can write a bubble sort algorithm under pressure.
The Broader Problem
Yegor’s post about Amazon captured this issue years ago: the one-size-fits-all recruitment model may be efficient, but it’s ultimately shortsighted. It reduces candidates to numbers, ignoring the individuality and unique perspectives that make them valuable. I know Yegor personally, and they should have hired him.
If big tech companies want to attract top-tier talent, they need to rethink their approach. Recruitment shouldn’t just be about efficiency—it should be about respect, alignment, and finding the right fit. Yet another way Big Tech is missing the mark.
Erik J. Larson
I mean, tons of things alienate me about big tech, but yeah the interview process is definitely up there.
Even for juniors, when I'm involved in an interview (not always, depends on the client), I do not do bullshit rote memorization questions. I pick a few real problems from personal experience, explain the problem, and ask the candidate to reason through a solution. Sometimes with a programming exercise for entry-level people, but I don't bother with that for anyone with more than a few years experience.
I don't even care what solution they come up with. The point is to find out how they think, and critically that they *do* think. I don't need anyone whose solution to any problem is either rote, Googled, or "it can't be done".
This doesn't apply to big tech companies alone. It reflects how the vast majority of the educational, academic, and R&D systems operate (though there are, of course, a few exceptions.) This mentality is deeply ingrained in our culture and shapes our understanding of learning and what 'expertise' is supposed to mean. I have been reading critiques like this for decades, and there seems to be widespread agreement. Yet, there is no indication that we are willing to change the system.