We stopped interviewing for algorithms and started interviewing for taste

We used to run a whiteboard round. It measured, as far as we can tell, how recently a candidate had practised whiteboard rounds — a quantity uncorrelated with anything we care about.

Now we ask for something they built and a critique of it. The build tells us what they can do. The critique tells us what they can see, and what they can see is the ceiling on what they will eventually build.

The best signal in the entire process turned out to be a single moment: the candidate who, unprompted, points at the part of their own work they're not happy with and explains precisely why. That person will raise the standard of everyone around them.

Our offer-acceptance rate went up. Our first-year attrition went to nearly zero. And the interview stopped being an ordeal and started being the most interesting conversation in the candidate's week — which, it turns out, is also good recruiting.