Interviews are the worst way to evaluate engineers, except for all the other options available, so it's essential to make the interview process as accurate as possible.

The technical interview process is flawed; it focuses on memorizing riddles rather than assessing real job skills.

To screen and evaluate engineers effectively, leverage your experience and insights gained from interviewing candidates.

The core problem in interviews is the tension between measuring quick problem-solving skills and the ability to handle larger projects over time. Many of the best programmers have numerous job options, making it challenging for companies that require a trial employment period to attract them.

The results of the survey indicate that the engineering hiring process has not yet fully adapted to the rapid advancements in AI coding tools, with many still relying on outdated evaluation methods.

No engineer passes all their interviews, highlighting the inconsistency and noise in the interview process.

Even if engineers are better at evaluating other engineers, the existence of recruiters suggests there are efficiencies in the hiring process that are not immediately apparent.

The best engineers typically pass about 80% of their interviews, indicating that failing some questions is common and not a reflection of overall skill.

When interviewing candidates, we assess their problem-solving skills and how they think about trade-offs, rather than just their ability to write code.