Let's get more productive!
How to hire developers that really deliver
Hiromi Matsumoto
Partner, Mass Productive
Hiring is Broken
Hiring can feel a bit like a blind date. The resume reads great. The interview goes well. But two weeks into the job, you realize something’s off. Deadlines slip. Communication is murky. The work lacks polish—or never lands at all.
Experiences like these erode our trust in the talent acquisition process. Shahzad Jameel, CEO of VirtueNetz, estimates that “a bad development hire can cost up to $450,000” once you factor in lost productivity, team morale, and the cost of replacement. Most projects don’t have the resources to lose this kind of money or time. According to Growin, the average time just to hire a developer is 35 days—before training even begins.
The problem isn’t dishonesty. It’s that common hiring practices reward people who are great at self-promotion—even if they’re not great at the job.
Hiring usually relies on three components:
A resume (which reflects opportunities over accomplishments)
An interview (which tests charisma more than competence)
A portfolio (which exposes team efforts not individual contributions)
A study published in the International Journal of Selection and Assessment found that “over-reliance on self-promotion leads to hiring decisions based on image, not ability.” These biased and inaccurate hiring decisions often reward confidence over skill, and extroversion over execution—leading to the costly missteps mentioned above.
Software development, in particular, lends itself to a better way of vetting candidates. Developers are typically used to working independently within a collaborative environment—committing small, well-defined units of work to a shared codebase. Most modern teams already operate with structured backlogs, user stories, and documentation. That means many companies already have real, scoped work ready to assign. With the right process in place, it’s entirely possible to shift the hiring focus away from how someone presents, and instead measure how they perform in realistic conditions.
At Mass Productive, we’ve seized on this opportunity by implementing paid, time-boxed assignments into our hiring process that mirror the kind of work we expect on the job. These scoped features integrate design, communication, and execution into a real-work developer challenge that we offer to promising candidates, allowing us to assess their true talents—not just their interview skills.
Whether it’s building a front-end interface or integrating with a live API, each candidate receives:
A clearly defined task with expectations, context, and optional design files
30 hours of billable time over 10 days to complete as much as they can
Full freedom to choose their tech stack, justify trade-offs, and submit a working demo
We evaluate submissions across five criteria:
Execution – How well does it match the brief?
Interactivity – Are animations and transitions enhancing UX?
Performance – Is it mobile-friendly and efficient?
Proficiency – How much was completed in the time allowed?
Professionalism – Was the code clean, modular, and documented?
Communication – Did the candidate ask smart questions, share progress clearly, and respond to feedback with initiative?
Different candidates may receive different challenges, tailored to their experience or strengths—but every evaluation uses the same general rubric.
It’s ethical. We pay candidates for their time. No speculative labor.
It’s productive. The work is real and reusable. Even if we don’t hire someone, we often end up with a working prototype or new ideas we can build on.
It’s revealing. You quickly see who follows through, who communicates clearly, and who takes initiative with limited input.
It’s mutual. Candidates also get a clear view into how you work—what your expectations are, how tasks are delivered, and how collaboration happens. Some may opt out on their own, which saves everyone time and ensures better long-term fit.
Some might be skeptical, concerned that candidates might cheat the challenge by using AI. We welcome it. We want our technologists to use modern tools to increase efficiency—as long as they’re in control of the results. If a candidate can debug or explain the code they submit, their solution reflects thoughtful architecture and naming, and they’ve added meaningful touches like animations, edge case handling, or usability improvements, then the use of AI isn’t a shortcut—it’s a skill.
If you’ve been burned by resumes that didn’t translate to results, you’re not alone. Traditional hiring methods are slow, expensive, and biased toward presentation over performance.
The good news is you don’t have to gamble. You can design a hiring process that:
Prioritizes real-world work
Rewards follow-through, not just first impressions
Gives value back to your team—even before the hire is made
When you hire based on how people work, not just how they interview, your team becomes stronger, your product moves faster, and your company becomes more productive.
We’ve helped companies turn vague hiring processes into real-world evaluations that deliver results. If you’d like help crafting a scoped, ethical, and effective test for your next hire, reach out—we’d be happy to help.