What is the point of the technical interview? Should it be designed to be a knock-out punch to unsuspecting candidates? Is it designed to “weed out” the candidates that do not have the required technical capabilities in a few or a number of specific areas? These are common practices that set up the selection process in a way that will eliminate some of the best overall candidates under consideration. In this article I will cover a few common practices in the technical interview process that impugn organizations ability to truly assess who will be the best overall match for open technical roles.
In order to understand the impact of these and other practices I will cover it is important to remember that the technical interview is one part of the overall process. Why is it important to remember that? When the technical interview is set up in a way where it is designed more to eliminate or approve candidates rather than make a complete evaluation of their technical skills and capabilities. The decision making power and influence is essentially being placed in the hands of one or two people who typically are not qualified or in a position to make these decisions. Think about that for a second. Sure the hiring manager may review the technical interview feedback and evaluations then make the call. However when the technical interview is conducted and reviewed in this pass/fail framework the decision has essentially been made for them. This often means they never even meet many of the candidates which leads to the next common practice that will eliminate some of the best overall candidates.
Conducting the technical interview first after an initial screen with a recruiter has become the norm within many organizations unfortunately. Conventional wisdom being why waste other people’s time if the candidate isn’t up to snuff technically. This would seem to make sense and is typically done as oftentimes there is a high percentage of candidates that are not passing the technical interview. Boom! red flag number one. This is a result of this pass/fail paradigm in the technical evaluation process. Many managers and leaders see that as having high standards. This is a misconception. The weed out technical interview approach is based on evaluating specific technologies needed for the position for which the candidate is being considered and typically only those technologies.
Setting up the technical interview to align to the exact technologies of a product or stack of technologies specific to an organization with no elasticity to assess the overall technical competencies of each individual creates the perception that candidates are not qualified. When in fact all it has done has provided a very narrow, incomplete assessment of their technical capabilities.
I get it cases are piling up, deals are in the pipeline, implementations are scheduled months out. Managers and leaders feel like they don’t have time for people who require learning on the job and training; they need people who will hit the ground running or have minimal ramp up time. So keep interviewing until you find that person right? It is not uncommon to see positions stay open for months as candidates file through being interviewed and eliminated. This is happening because these are positions with very high demand skill sets. Trying to find the perfect candidate is an imperfect approach, but not for the obvious reason. The candidate who checks all the boxes technically often is still not the best overall match. So why keep doing this? This is a textbook example of the tail wagging the dog. Stop and redesign your thought processes.
Rather than set the process up to have the pass/fail, weed out technical interviews first or at any point in the process. The hiring manager or a lead within the organization should conduct the first interview. In this interview they can probe into the candidates technical background and provide guidance to the technical interviewers on what areas to focus on in the candidates overall technical background. They can also focus on the non-technical attributes that will help determine their overall technical capabilities and ability to ramp up and learn where they may fall short in the technical interview. This first interview is a good time to focus on key determinants of success in a technical role that cannot be covered in a technical interview such as; intellectual curiosity, ambition, self guidance, stability, problem solving, and collaboration.
The idea is to have that first interview provide an opportunity to get a more complete picture of the candidate rather than just a rote technical interview. Let’s rewind to the scenario where candidates are going through the technical interview with a high percentage being declined. When this happens it is very common for the role to sit open for months, have I mentioned that, as the team continues to spend time and energy interviewing while the overall team is shorthanded. It is not a secret that there is a shortage of talent who possess the required skills for positions in cybersecurity and cloud technology related roles. When teams look for the perfect candidate technically they are passing over some of the best candidates under consideration.
A better approach is to focus on the intangible, non technical attributes while also getting a complete picture of the individuals technical skills and more importantly how they were acquired. It is important to note that when taking this approach you also need to broaden your target skills and technical capabilities to areas that are not an exact match but are relevant and will be indicators of success. That is how you will find the best candidates for long term success. Let’s look at an example of how that is done.
I’ll use the example of hiring a network security engineer in a large enterprise. When taking the approach where the technical interview is first and designed to assess in a pass-fail format. You will see the scenario where positions can sit open for months and candidates revolve through in a turnstile like fashion, one getting declined after another. Many of the candidates being declined after this first interview are in very senior level engineering roles at similar organizations, but they don’t have the exact line up of technical skills at the degree needed to “pass” the technical interview. Let’s assume one or a few of the candidates rejected were network engineers who have some experience with the required security technologies needed but not yet at the level required in the role. Having a first interview with the hiring manager or a lead will provide a chance to discover how they accomplished gaining the skills to become a senior level network engineer with a long list of accomplishments. You will be able to discover the candidates who are focused on continual learning, development and challenging themselves to continue to grow technically and professionally. You can learn who has mentored and trained more junior engineers, or have been specialists at handling hot customers, or those who have really solid work ethics. These are just a few examples of the many things that can be discovered. When you conduct the first interview as a technical weed out interview you don’t learn any of this!
These non-technical attributes can then be weighted and considered in conjunction with the technical interview as a better approach to determine overall fit and future success. Ultimately it will lead to better hires because you’ve centered on a broader set of capabilities. You will also fill your openings more quickly. In the time spent going through the vicious pass-fail cycle. One of these highly ambitious, intellectually curious, high potential candidates could be well on their way to mastering the new technologies needed. That’s not even the best point. Within a year they could be well on their way to being one of the best engineers on the team or in the company who comes with useful technical strengths you may not have had on the team previously. That’s building a team, not just filling jobs. Stop trying to knock people out in the technical interview and get to know them first. You might be pleasantly surprised by what you find out.
