.png)
Let’s start with a truth that we all know but rarely say out loud: Automated coding challenges are great for filtering out the noise, but when it comes to senior engineers, they’re woefully inadequate. If you’ve ever used one of these platforms to evaluate experienced developers, you’ve probably noticed a few things. For one, senior engineers aren’t spending their days solving algorithm puzzles that feel like a high-school math test. They’re not cracking LeetCode problems between design meetings or debugging production issues. So why, then, do we keep forcing them into these automated coding assessments that don’t reflect their actual day-to-day?
If you’re still using automated coding tests to assess senior engineers, you’re probably missing out on the very talent you’re trying to attract. And the reason is simple: coding tests aren’t built for experienced developers. They don’t account for the skills that matter at the senior level—things like system design, code reviews, technical leadership, and debugging complex, real-world problems.
The Problem with Automated Coding Challenges
Let’s break it down. Coding challenges—automated ones especially—are inherently limited. They test a narrow band of skills, often focusing on algorithmic problem-solving and raw coding ability. And while those skills are valuable, they’re just one piece of the puzzle for senior engineers.
For experienced developers, it’s not about solving the problem the fastest. It’s about solving the right problems the right way. Automated tests can’t assess things like:
• Collaboration: Senior engineers lead teams, provide mentorship, and guide the development process. Where’s the automated test for that?
• Architectural thinking: These engineers are the ones making decisions that shape the architecture of an entire project. How does solving an algorithm in 30 minutes measure that skill?
• Code reviews: Senior engineers often spend more time reviewing other people’s code than writing their own. Automated challenges don’t get close to replicating that process.
And let’s not forget the obvious: Automated coding challenges are often so detached from real-world scenarios that they feel more like a high-stakes game show than an actual job assessment.
Why Senior Engineers Hate These Tests
Imagine you’ve been in the industry for over a decade. You’ve designed scalable systems, led successful projects, and debugged gnarly issues that kept the product team awake at night. Now, after years of proving your mettle, you’re given a test that feels like a pop quiz from your freshman-year computer science course. How would you feel?
That’s why senior engineers either avoid these tests or half-heartedly complete them, knowing they don’t reflect their true abilities. When you ask them to jump through hoops that seem disconnected from their day-to-day work, you’re not just wasting their time—you’re sending the message that you don’t understand what they actually do.
Kodiva.ai: A Better Approach for Senior Engineers
This is where Kodiva.ai steps in with a radically different approach. We don’t ask senior engineers to solve toy problems; instead, we assess them based on real-world engineering tasks—code reviews, system architecture, debugging issues in production—the stuff that truly matters.
Kodiva.ai combines AI-driven automation with human insights to offer a more nuanced evaluation. Here’s what makes it different:
1. Real-World Scenarios: Kodiva replicates actual engineering challenges. Candidates might be asked to review a pull request, identify flaws in a system design, or debug an existing application. These are the things senior engineers do every day, and this is how they should be assessed.
2. AI + Human Scoring: While AI handles the heavy lifting, such as identifying patterns and scoring efficiency, human reviewers step in to assess the more subjective elements—like a candidate’s thought process, communication skills, and strategic decisions. This hybrid approach ensures that the evaluation captures not just what the candidate did, but how and why they did it.
3. No Bias, Just Insight: Automated tests can be impersonal and detached from the candidate’s actual experience. Kodiva’s assessments include feedback from expert engineers who understand the nuances of real-world engineering. This provides companies with deeper insights into a candidate’s true capabilities, and it also creates a better experience for candidates, who feel like they’re being assessed on the work they’ll actually do.
4. Cheat-Resistant: Kodiva’s blend of human and AI proctoring means that candidates can’t just copy-paste answers from Stack Overflow or rely on tools like ChatGPT to get through the test. Real engineers review the results, ensuring authenticity and integrity in the assessment.
The Future of Technical Assessments
So, what does this mean for the future of hiring? It means that the days of automated coding challenges are numbered—at least for senior roles. Companies need to stop relying on out-of-the-box solutions that treat every developer like they’re fresh out of school. Senior engineers need to be assessed on what they do best—leading teams, making architectural decisions, and solving complex, real-world problems.
And it’s not just about hiring better talent. It’s about providing a better candidate experience. The best engineers—the ones you really want—are tired of jumping through irrelevant hoops. They want to showcase their true abilities in a way that feels authentic and meaningful. And if you can offer that, you’re not just evaluating candidates—you’re attracting the best talent.
Kodiva.ai is at the forefront of this shift, offering a platform that respects senior engineers and evaluates them on what really matters. If you’re tired of filtering out great talent with irrelevant coding challenges, maybe it’s time to give Kodiva a try.
