Hiring from Both Sides of the Table

On Tue 29 Oct 2024, I was invited to speak at the October DevOps BCN Meetup in Barcelona about the challenges of hiring software engineers from both perspectives: the hiring manager’s perspective and the candidate’s perspective. I focused on how candidates may tailor their résumés and on how hiring managers may approach screening. I shared my thoughts on my ideal interview process consisting of two steps only: one cultural assessment and one technical assessment. And throughout my presentation I explained my technology-agnostic approach. Here is a summary of my speech.

Introduction

After introducing myself and setting the tone by joking on my real goal—promoting the four albums I have released so far in my musical career and announcing my upcoming novel The Shift—I was overwhelmed by the audience’s engagement. It was such a rich experience filled with interaction: the about 50 attendees proved to be extremely interested engaging with many questions and requests for advice.

Before starting I disclaimed:

The résumé

Building a compelling résumé as a software engineer is challenging, particularly when it comes to distinguishing experience from expertise.

Experience vs. Expertise

Experience is generally about exposure: the roles you’ve held, the projects you’ve worked on, the scope of your professional journey. It conveys the extent of what you’ve done and for how long, painting a picture of your career path and the environments you’ve been part of. On a résumé, experience is typically reflected in job titles, durations, and summaries of key projects and responsibilities.

Expertise, on the other hand, is depth. It’s the mastery or specialized skill level you bring to an area, often reflected in problem-solving abilities. Expertise suggests a level of proficiency that allows you to approach challenges more strategically and effectively. It tends to be durable, staying with you as you adapt to new environments and tools.

On a résumé, expertise often shines through in the HOW rather than the WHAT: in specific achievements, in how you approached challenges, and in the impact you made. It is something not easily captured on paper, even between the lines: it’s often only in the interview where true depth of knowledge and skills become clear.

Essential Sections

Let’s break down some of the essential sections that can help candidates stand out in a hiring manager’s screening process.

Profile

Start with a profile section, a brief yet essential part of the résumé. Here, in a few paragraphs, convey what defines you as a PROFESSIONAL and as a PERSON. Think of it as of your business card—what is it that makes you unique? This is your chance to communicate the qualities and principles that shape you beyond technical skills. A well-crafted profile introduces you before any bullet points do, setting a foundation for the rest of the résumé.

One word of caution: avoid tailoring your résumé for each specific job position. I hate seeing different versions of a résumé from the same person for different job descriptions. It implies a kind of cunning, and from my viewpoint, it comes across as insincere. The résumé should reflect who you are as a whole, not an adaptation for the next job in line.

—Use a cover letter instead

Competences

The competences section should focus on major areas of expertise, not a long list of languages, frameworks, platforms… A list alone doesn’t communicate familiarity or depth of knowledge; in fact, it can dilute the impression of expertise. I usually skip over these lists altogether. Competence isn’t defined by the number of tools you know, but by the skills you’ve built through your career. Therefore, what should be listed here are skills, including soft ones. Here are some examples:

Experience

This section should be straightforward, presenting key positions, projects, and publications. It’s where the real differentiation between expertise and experience comes into play. Here’s what matters in each.

Positions

Show the roles you’ve held with the year and month of both the start and end dates. Hiring managers use this timeline to spot “job hoppers”, a concern in any industry. If you’ve moved quickly between jobs, it can raise questions about commitment or adaptability. Keep each role description brief: ideally, no more than 3–4 lines, focusing on your primary responsibilities and key achievements.

Projects

Describe each major project with similar brevity (3–4 lines). Include the project’s duration, your tasks, roles, responsibilities, and relevant technologies. This is the place to list the frameworks, platforms, and languages you’ve applied. Here, a list demonstrates the technologies you’ve worked with in context.

Publications

If you’ve written articles, contributed to books, or spoken at conferences, include these too. Specify details as you would in a bibliography: magazine issue, publisher, date. Your résumé should showcase both your technical skills and your ability to share knowledge.

Education and Certifications

Education can be a mixed bag in terms of relevance. Do you have a PhD? Great! But I won’t worry about the subject matter. Why not? Because the gap between academia and the real world is considerable: practically a chasm in many European countries where I’ve worked, like Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland—what about Spain?

What’s important about your degree is its completion and the discipline that it required. A degree shows that you can handle deadlines and play by the rules, skills that carry weight in any job, regardless of the subject.

Now, certifications are a different story. I acquired several between the late 1990s and the 2010s, and I found them valuable, especially for engagements as speaker, conference presenter, classroom and e-learning instructor, and author. Certifications opened doors back then, but today, their value has changed. Hiring managers might only consider official certifications or challenging ones, assuming they are able to discern them. After all, certifications nowadays are issued by just about everyone and everything.

Let us know move to the other side of the table.

The Screening Process

My ideal screening process typically involves a small team of senior tech-lead and people-leads to ensure a well-rounded perspective. This approach allows to catch any gaps, maintain a high standard, and keep the process consistent.

When I screen résumés, I go through about a dozen in half an hour, time-boxed, allowing roughly 2–3 minutes per résumé. Within those few minutes, I evaluate three key areas to make disqualification decisions.

Pertinence

Too many applicants apply for positions they aren’t qualified, not even remotely. When I see that, it’s an instant rejection. Understanding the job you’re applying for is critical.

Competences

Do the skills mentioned align with the position? This includes first and foremost the major expertise areas, and only secondarily the practical technologies used in past projects.

—Technology-agnostic approach

Experience

Positions, projects, and relevant dates. Experience doesn’t only show time spent but reflects professional’s depth and consistency.

The Interviews

Interviews are a vital part of the hiring process, serving not only as a way to assess a candidate’s skills, but mainly as a foundation for understanding their mindset and how they approach problem solving.

Point of Reference

To get the most from an interview, I believe the candidate should view the hiring manager as their point of reference throughout the process. A strong candidate experience relies on clarity and a steady point of contact, allowing the candidate to focus on demonstrating their abilities without unnecessary stress.

My Ideal Approach

I approach interviews in two distinct phases:

  1. A 1-hour cultural assessment allows us to check alignment with core values, assessing how well the candidate fits within the company’s and team’s culture
  2. A 3-hour technical assessment measures the candidate’s performance under pressure, providing the depth needed to see how they think and operate

Three hours is a significant investment of time, I know, but it’s essential to connect with the candidate’s true self, and for the candidate to experience firsthand what it will be like working with the hiring manager, the team, and the company, both technically and personally.

No Coding Interviews, Please

I hate coding interviews: too often, they miss the point of what it means to be a software engineer. Engineering is about mindset, not memorizing syntax or algorithms. Instead, I like to work through one or more case studies, moving from a high-level architectural view down into the implementation details. This type of discussion, in my experience, is far more illuminating, revealing the candidate’s technical insight, creativity, and problem-solving.

Case Study Topics

Depending on the role, the topics covered in the technical assessment may vary, but they generally include areas such as:

Let’s Talk

Case studies are designed to focus on practical application rather than theoretical show off. For example, if I ask whether you would adopt a SQL or NoSQL database for a specific solution, I’m not looking for a lecture on the differences between the two. Instead, I want you to make a choice and explain your reasoning. A clear answer followed by a rationale speaks volumes more than a display of theoretical knowledge.

Judgement over Certainty

If you need a moment to think, by all means, take it. Thinking out loud is encouraged: it allows interviewers to understand your line of thought and gives you a chance to explain your decision-making process. That said, avoid filling time with theory. Let your thought process guide you to a practical answer. Often, there isn’t a “right” or “wrong” answer; many technical questions are open-ended. If you genuinely don’t see a significant advantage for one option over another, SAY SO, provided you can back up your stance. The best answer is always an honest one that shows sound judgment rather than certainty.

Direct Feedback

I’m a big believer in direct feedback. After each interview step, the interviewers leave the room for a maximum of 10 minutes, make a decision, and return to inform the candidate of the outcome. No “we’ll let you know,” no endless waiting for an email; right there, the candidate receives the decision, along with immediate feedback.

This feedback loop goes both ways. I find it just as essential to hear from the candidate about their experience. The decision, however, is final: there’s no back-and-forth or second-guessing. Clear communication, in-the-moment feedback, and a straightforward, respectful process make a world of difference in the interview experience.

Unrequested Advice

In the hiring process, both managers and candidates have a shared responsibility: to figure out if they actually want to work together. The stakes are high for both sides, and taking an honest approach can help ensure a successful match.

Do I Want to Work with This Person?

This question is essential. Both the hiring manager and the candidate need to evaluate whether they can see themselves working with one another, day in and day out. For candidates, this involves assessing the manager’s style, the team’s dynamics, and the overall company vibe. For hiring managers, it’s about determining if the candidate not only has the right skills, but also fits the culture and will contribute positively to the team.

Do I want to work here?

Equally important is this question for the candidate. A candidate can’t answer this without firsthand experience, which is why providing sufficient information about the workplace is critical. An in-person meeting is invaluable in this context, especially when candidates have the chance to tour the facility. Being able to picture themselves in that space can help them gauge whether they’d be comfortable and productive in the environment.

Trial Periods?

Trial periods can be incredibly useful for both parties, as they provide a short-term “test drive” for the role. However, they shouldn’t be forced if either side has reservations. Entering a trial period with a negative feeling can lead to unnecessary costs and complications, especially if things don’t work out. Both parties should feel confident going into a trial, seeing it as a mutual opportunity rather than a one-sided evaluation.

One Thumbs Down Rules Them All

There’s a practice I call “one thumbs down rules them all.” No matter how many decision-makers are involved, if even one person gives a thumbs down, the candidate is out of the running. This rule, a form of veto power, helps keep standards consistent and avoids compromising on essential values or fit.

Opinionated vs. Flexible, Like vs. Dislike

Personality and communication style play significant roles in hiring, and it’s easy to get caught up in subtle nuances. How does a candidate handle disagreements? Are they overly opinionated, or can they flex when necessary? A good candidate brings expertise without needing to prove superiority. Both sides need to find a balance between like and dislike, assertiveness and adaptability.

Hiring Managers as Leaders

For hiring managers, it’s important to view hiring through the lens of servant leadership. A servant leader prioritizes their team’s success over their own and views each hire as an opportunity to strengthen the team as a whole. When hiring, think about how you can set up the candidate for success. Ask yourself if you’re prepared to invest the time and resources to support their growth and integration into the team.

Be Yourself—Really!

Both candidates and hiring managers should take one simple piece of advice: be yourself. Don’t lie, don’t wear a mask, and avoid pretending to be something you’re not. Authenticity goes a long way in creating an honest and productive working relationship. A good fit is one where neither side has to hide their true self to fit in.

 

Fabio Scagliola,