Not exactly, but ageism is probably a welcome externality. The value of leetcode is mostly in helping hiring-people wash their hands of some responsibility.
Why do I call it abusive? "Study this stuff, that isn't actually related to your job, on your own time, for free, for months, and we might give you a job." Even if you do get a job, they still abused you.
Those are your three alternatives to the whiteboard interview.
Which would you prefer? (I'm perfectly willing to admit I've missed one[1], but it's probably a subset of these three.)
[1] Life-long German apprenticeship/Japanese salaryman arrangements don't work in the fast rise/fast fall tech environment. Also, Japanese salaryman culture is horrific.
You can do a whiteboard interview without doing leet code. Do an actual coding interview (whether whiteboard or not). Don't do credentials-only. Don't do a lottery. And make sure you don't fall for a BS artist.
But in your coding interview, don't do leet code. Just give a regular coding problem. Not a big one, not a long one, not an especially tricky one. Then watch them code, and listen. (Ask them to think out loud - it's important to understand how they think.) That's all it takes.
This limits the signal of the skill ceiling that you can pick up from the interview. Give an easy whiteboard problem, and both a great candidate and a good candidate will be evaluated to be roughly the same. (No red flags, both solved the question)
It's a bit like hiring a plumber, by giving each prospective contractor a two question quiz: "Which way does crap flow?" [1] and "When is payday?" [2]
At that point, you are just going with a lottery system.
[1] Downhill
[2] Friday
But we still knew when great showed up. I was one of the interviewers. I remember that the interview switched, from us asking questions to find out how much the candidate knew, to us asking questions so we could learn stuff.
Now she's a principal engineer. In her spare time, she's also my boss.
Doctors don’t have to relearn everything on the boards every time they talk to a new job, and that definitely helps combat ageism in that field.
I am so glad to have spent my entire career in the parts of our industry where this is not true.
1. Gatekeeping "Do you have the credential for X from the system? If so first come first served for defined pay bracket.". While lower friction once done it is an informational organizing nightmare even before dealing with perverse incentives in who can work as what. Choice of credentials vs demand would still be an issue. 2. Defacto Corveé system of "You work at X and live at Y or else." Obvious issues with lack of freedom and inefficient use of human potential. 3. Agent Dynastic: Less formalized gatekeeping where the sales must be handled by an intermediary to seperate non-job relevant skills. If you can sell your own labor then it is just labor market capitalism essentially as the non-relevant skills are tautologically now job related.
I get how it sucks but I am not sure how to improve upon it without leading to the problems of the other approaches.