As a hiring manager and someone who has designed interview processes, I probably wouldn't use this product, but in fairness to Litebulb I wouldn't use any overly structured code assessment tool in interviews. You'll likely find people willing to give you a shot, but I think you'll discover over time that your data-driven customers conclude your product doesn't give better overall signal on a candidate long term. The coding aspect of an interview is already a very minor part of overall feedback...especially for more senior positions.
Something I would use is a tool to rethink and manage the virtual onsite experience. Virtual onsites are awful and rooted in legacy thinking. The people designing them likely never experienced it from the candidate's perspective. Why is it usually done in a single, long day? Why aren't interview transcripts a thing? Why does it all have to be done synchronously? These are just some of the top of mind questions that come up when looking at the hiring process these days.
Something I would use is a tool to rethink and manage the virtual onsite experience. Virtual onsites are awful and rooted in legacy thinking. The people designing them likely never experienced it from the candidate's perspective. Why is it usually done in a single, long day? Why aren't interview transcripts a thing? Why does it all have to be done synchronously? These are just some of the top of mind questions that come up when looking at the hiring process these days.