In the competitive world of software development, technical testing has become an essential filter in the recruitment process in IT companies. These evaluations aim to measure candidates’ real abilities, ensuring they possess the necessary skills to face everyday challenges.
At Ninja Challenge, we not only help developers get certified and showcase their experience through standardized technical testing, but we also connect companies with qualified talent. We believe that a fair and effective process benefits both developers and companies, creating a stronger and more transparent job market.
What are technical assessments?
Technical testing are evaluations designed to measure a candidate’s problem-solving and programming abilities. These assessments are part of the hiring process for technical roles, such as software developers, data engineers and other IT-related positions.
The content and difficulty of these tests may vary, but they generally include practical exercises such as:
- Algorithm and data structures: Assesing how a candidate solves logical problems and optimizes solutions.
- Function implementation: Creating small code snippets to evaluate programming language proficiency.
- Practical projects: Building mini applications or functions that simulate daily tasks of the role.
- Live coding: Solving problems in real time while being observed by an interviewer, who evaluates not only the final result, but also the problem-solving process.
The main goal of these evaluations is to ensure that candidates possess not only theoretical knowledge, but also the ability to apply it in real-world situations. They also allow companies to measure candidates’ analytical thinking, adaptability, and creativity.
Why do some developers reject technical testing?
Technical testing is a valuable tool for IT companies, but it’s not always well received by developers. There are several reasons behind this resistance, and addressig them is crucial to building more effective and fair hiring processes.
1. Filtering qualified candidates
Technical tests serve as an initial filter to help companies reduce the volume of applicants, retaining only those who meet the basic requirements for the position. The job market is often saturated, and many applicants do not meet the minimum technical standards.
However, for some developers, these tests can feel like an unfair barrier—especially when they don’t reflect the actual skills needed for the job. Many argue that assessments should focus on practical tasks related to the day-to-day responsibilities of the position, rather than algorithmic challenges that feel disconnected from real work.2. Evaluation of fundamental abilities
While algorithmic exercises may seem overly theoretical, their purpose is to evaluate the mastery of core programming concepts such as data structures and problem-solving. These tests typically avoid the use of external libraries and focus on how candidates apply foundational knowledge.
Problems arise when evaluations become too academic, ignoring the modern tools and frameworks developers use daily. This disconnect leads to frustration, as candidates feel their practical competencies are being overlooked.3. Adaptability and learning capabilities
Not all technical tests seek a single correct answer. Many aim to evaluate the candidate’s reasoning, their approach to problem-solving, and their ability to adapt to new challenges.
Still, developers often find these goals inconsistent, especially when there is no clear feedback after completing the task. A lack of transparency around evaluation criteria can leave candidates wondering what went wrong.
4. Unpaid time and effort
One of the most common complaints is the excessive time commitment some technical tests require. In some cases, candidates are asked to spend entire days, or even weekends, solving complex problems with no guarantee of moving forward in the hiring process.
This practice is often seen as a form of unpaid labor, as some companies may exploit technical tests to obtain free solutions to real problems. As an alternative, many developers propose shorter, supervised assessments or even paid trial periods to evaluate candidates in a real working context.5. Lack of alignment with actual work
Finally, there’s a perception that some technical tests don’t accurately reflect the real responsibilities of the role. Solving abstract algorithmic problems might showcase logical ability but doesn’t necessarily prove a candidate can collaborate effectively, use specific tools, or adapt to a company’s workflows.
A more balanced approach would combine technical tests with interviews and situational assessments that simulate the real work environment.