For purposes of discussion, let&#x27;s take it as a given that a work-hire tests are the best way to screen candidates.<p>The effort required to administer an on-site work-hire test is non-zero, therefore I cannot administer such a test to every applicant.<p>I therefore need a way to determine who to bring on-site, in order to administer such a test. I cannot phone screen every single applicant due to the cost involved.<p>That process could also be a work-hire test of some sort (e.g. a remote coding project), but regardless of what has been said on this thread, many good applicants will drop off at this step. I know this empirically, because I&#x27;ve  experienced it, many, many times.<p>Additionally, the people who tend to drop off because of this extra effort tend to be senior applicants, who often have multiple offers from multiple companies due to the competiveness of the current hiring market. It also disproportionately drives away passive candidates, who are often the best candidates, because the best candidates are often not looking for work (since they are good, people who have worked with them previously want to work with them again, and they get poached).<p>So I need some method of sourcing and filtering candidates down that is <i>non-intrusive to both our development team AND the applicant</i>. This is the reality. This simply has to happen in a startup&#x27;s hiring pipeline.<p>Currently, most companies do this by looking at resumes. That is obviously sub-optimal.<p>Any suggestions for alternatives?<p>EDIT: spelling.