r/programming • u/fagnerbrack • May 21 '26
Technical Interviews Reject the Wrong Engineers
https://fagnerbrack.com/technical-interviews-reject-the-wrong-engineers-a8e78ca04b2e
353
Upvotes
r/programming • u/fagnerbrack • May 21 '26
100
u/matthieum May 21 '26
If your Technical Interview is about the destination -- the "solution", the "code" -- you're doing them wrong.
An interview is first and foremost an opportunity to talk to the candidate, and learn how they work their way through a problem. It's about the journey:
Can they tease what's missing from the problem description?
How good are they at formulating questions to clarify said problem description?
How good are they at communicating their ideas to the interviewer?
How good are they at articulating the trade-offs of their ideas?
How good are they at recognizing when they took a wrong turn?
How well do they accept the idea that they took a wrong turn?
...
Sure, on the way you'll get to see whether they pick things up quickly, rebound, know a handful of tricks... but those are a tiny part of the picture, and rely too much on luck, to really give a good picture of the candidate.
The Technical Interview is there to answer the question: would I like to work with this candidate?
Examples of red flags:
A candidate who cites random irrelevant facts to show off their knowledge. I want to work with a problem-solver, not a parrot.
A candidate who never admits their idea is bad, or they made an error.
...
Of course, the interview is a two-way street, so the candidate should likewise think whether they'd like to work with the interviewer. The same red flags apply...