How should you approach take-home assignments given during job interviews, especially to avoid over-engineering? For example, if you're asked to create a mobile-friendly web app that allows users to upload a PDF, sends it to a mock server for signing, and then displays the signed document, how would you start? Do you prefer starting with sketches and prototypes, or do you jump straight into coding an MVP? What are the key elements to focus on, and how can you avoid feeling overwhelmed by the urge to add too many features? I'm finding that my perfectionism and anxiety make me overthink things, so I really want to know how to recognize when a project is finished. Would including testing for things like corrupted PDFs or password protection be considered necessary or excessive? Lastly, can anyone suggest resources—websites, books, or social media accounts—that could help me improve in this area?
1 Answer
As someone who interviews a lot of candidates, I gotta say, take-home assignments can be a bit contentious. They often don't respect your time and are not the best reflection of what you can do. But if you're tackling one, I suggest asking the interviewer about what to focus on. Personally, I prefer giving candidates a 30-minute coding challenge during a live session where they can ask questions and clarify expectations, which is way more productive than a lengthy take-home that can consume too much time without the right feedback.
I get where you're coming from, but I think that speed coding challenges have their own issues too. They often just measure someone's ability to recall past experiences rather than truly showcase their skills. Real-life coding takes context and thought, which take-homes tend to offer more of—provided you manage your time right.