TL;DR
The CodeSubmit integration for Greenhouse embeds real-world coding assessments into your ATS workflow—enable tests from the Greenhouse dashboard, view status and reports in the candidate record, and support async, live, or hybrid interview formats. Use pilots to validate templates and rubrics, track invitation-to-completion and scoring variance, and apply a clear implementation checklist to minimize rollout friction. With proper configuration and monitoring, the integration reduces manual work, improves candidate experience, and yields clearer data for technical hiring decisions—complementing resume-screening automation tools to further reduce time-to-hire and improve review accuracy.
The CodeSubmit integration for Greenhouse connects real-world coding assessments directly to your applicant tracking system so engineering teams can assign, track, and review take-home and live coding tests without leaving Greenhouse. The integration surfaces assessment status and links to results inside the candidate's interview kit and makes it straightforward to add CodeSubmit as an interview stage.
This article explains what the integration does, who should deploy it, and the measurable benefits—reduced manual work, clearer candidate data, and faster, more consistent technical decisions. It also offers practical setup steps, best practices for scoring and candidate experience, and an implementation checklist you can use during rollout.
What the integration does in practice: you enable CodeSubmit in your Greenhouse account, add a CodeSubmit interview stage to job pipelines, send tests from the Greenhouse dashboard, and view submission status and reports directly inside Greenhouse. That flow replaces fragmented email attachments, manual test links, and separate spreadsheets used to track take-home assignments.
The combination supports async take-homes, live/shared coding sessions, and hybrid workflows. It also includes a library of customizable, real-world tasks and the option to upload existing assignments so teams can keep existing technical standards while gaining process automation and visibility.
Primary use cases — who gains most from the integration
- In-house engineering hiring teams Centralize assessment assignment, track submissions in Greenhouse, and reduce back-and-forth with candidates and hiring managers.
- Recruiters and sourcers Send tests directly from the candidate record and monitor completion without toggling between tools.
- Hiring managers wanting objective signals Standardized test templates and enrolled scoring reduce variability in technical evaluation.
- Companies scaling technical hiring Automate assessment workflows to handle higher volume while maintaining consistent candidate experience and data capture.
- Organizations using both async and live interviews Support hybrid processes—assign take-homes and schedule live sessions while retaining a single source of truth in Greenhouse.
Key features you get with the integration
- Send assessments from Greenhouse Add CodeSubmit as an interview stage and press Send Test to dispatch invitations without leaving Greenhouse.
- Status visibility See whether a candidate has been invited, started, or submitted within the Greenhouse dashboard.
- Direct result links Interview Kits include a link to view a submitted test in CodeSubmit, and you can View Report to read evaluations.
- Assessment library and custom uploads Use prebuilt real-world tasks or upload company-specific assignments to keep role fidelity.
- Supports async, live, and hybrid formats Flexible modes let teams choose the most informative and scalable interview format per role.
How the integration maps to hiring team responsibilities
| Responsibility |
What the integration changes |
| Recruiter |
Send tests, monitor submit status, add notes in Greenhouse candidate record |
| Hiring manager |
Access submitted code via Interview Kit link and evaluate with consistent rubrics |
| Engineering interviewer |
Run live sessions using CodeSubmit’s environment or review take-home submissions without separate accounts |
| Analytics/TA Ops |
Aggregate assessment completion metrics and pass rates across roles for process optimization |
Practical setup steps — quick implementation path: enable the CodeSubmit / Greenhouse integration in both admin consoles, add CodeSubmit to the job’s interview plan, configure the assessment templates and scoring rubrics in CodeSubmit, and train recruiters to use the Send Test button. There’s no partner implementation fee listed for this integration, so most organizations can get started without additional vendor onboarding costs.
Tip: start with a pilot job or two—use one role to validate templates, scoring, and the candidate experience before full rollout. This reduces disruption and gives measurable baseline metrics to compare after scaling.
Assessment types and recommended applications
- Async take-home assignments Use for roles where real-world problem-solving matters and where candidates need time to produce quality work (e.g., backend services, system design deliverables).
- Live coding sessions Best for assessing collaborative problem solving and communication under time constraints—use when pair-programming or whiteboard-style interactive assessment is needed.
- Hybrid assessments Combine asynchronous prep with a shorter live follow-up to validate approach and confirm reasoning, reducing live interview length while keeping interactive checks.
Important reporting metrics and what they signal
| Metric |
Why it matters / how to act |
| Invitation-to-completion rate |
Low rates indicate candidate friction or poorly communicated expectations—review timing, instructions, and test length. |
| Average time to submit |
Helps set realistic deadlines; very long times suggest test is too large or ambiguous. |
| Pass rate by role |
Spike or drop may indicate a mismatch between the assignment and real job requirements or changes in applicant pool quality. |
| Interviewer scoring variance |
High variance suggests unclear rubrics—standardize criteria and calibration sessions. |
Candidate experience considerations: make instructions explicit (expected time, tools permitted, and deliverable format), provide reasonable deadlines (48–72 hours for typical take-homes), and offer a channel for technical questions. Visibility in Greenhouse to show test status helps recruiters proactively follow up when candidates stall.
Good candidate experience reduces drop-off and produces higher-quality submissions. Keep tests focused on job-relevant skills, avoid overlong exercises, and communicate next steps clearly to set expectations and minimize anxiety.
Common implementation questions
Q: Does enabling the integration require additional vendor fees?
A: According to the integration details, there is no partner implementation fee listed, though your organization should confirm CodeSubmit licensing terms for assessments themselves.
Q: Will assessment results automatically attach to the candidate record?
A: Yes—the assessment’s status and a link to the submitted test appear inside Greenhouse; you can click View Report to access candidate results in CodeSubmit.
Q: Can I use my existing company assignments?
A: Yes—CodeSubmit allows uploads of your current assignments so you can maintain consistency while gaining the tracking and dispatch workflow.
Q: How do I measure success after rollout?
A: Track invitation-to-completion rates, time-to-hire, interviewer scoring variance, and quality of hire metrics over a pilot period then compare after broader deployment.
Implementation checklist (pre-deployment)
- Select pilot role(s) Choose 1–3 common technical roles to validate process and templates.
- Prepare assignment library Curate or create role-specific tasks with clear success criteria.
- Define rubrics Create standardized scoring rubrics and train evaluators to reduce variance.
- Configure integration Enable CodeSubmit in Greenhouse admin, add stages to interview plans, and test sending and reporting.
- Communicate with candidates Draft templates that explain expectations, deadlines, and technical support contacts.
Security and privacy: CodeSubmit publishes a privacy policy and integration documentation—confirm data residency and access controls that meet your organization’s policies before rolling out. Greenhouse provides the wrapper inside your ATS so access to candidate submissions is controlled by your existing Greenhouse permissions. For regulated industries, coordinate with legal/infosec to validate storage, retention, and logging requirements.
How CodeSubmit + Greenhouse compares to alternative approaches
| Approach |
Strengths |
Weaknesses |
| CodeSubmit integration in Greenhouse |
Centralized workflow, status visibility, direct links to reports, supports async/live/hybrid |
Requires configuration and training; organization must manage assessment quality |
| Ad-hoc email/send links |
Low setup overhead |
High manual work, poor tracking, inconsistent candidate experience |
| Standalone assessment platforms without ATS integration |
Rich assessment features may exist |
Requires manual reconciliation with ATS and more administrative overhead |
Measuring ROI: calculate saved recruiter and engineer hours from reduced manual communication and consolidation of tools, plus the impact of improved hiring decisions (shorter time-to-fill, reduced bad hires). Example: if recruiters save 2 hours per requisition and an average of 40 technical requisitions are processed per month, that’s 80 recruiter hours monthly—multiply by hourly rates to quantify direct savings.
Also factor qualitative benefits: less interviewer time spent chasing links, fewer data reconciliation errors, and faster onboarding because the right candidate is selected earlier in the process. Use pilot-period metrics to extrapolate annualized benefits.
Final recommendations and best practices
- Pilot before scale Validate templates and scoring on a small set of roles to get baseline metrics.
- Standardize rubrics Reduce subjective variation through clear scoring criteria and calibration sessions.
- Optimize for candidate time Aim for focused, job-relevant assignments and clear instructions to increase completion rates.
- Monitor analytics Use invitation-to-completion and scoring variance metrics to iterate on assignments and process.
- Keep stakeholders aligned Make sure recruiting, hiring managers, and engineering interviewers agree on what success looks like for each assessment.
