Hiring in Tech: What If We Did It Differently?

A reflection from someone who’s been on both sides—through layoffs, interviews, and rebuilding trust in the process.

1. Introduction: The Stakes Are High

Hiring isn't just hard on candidates—it’s hard on hiring teams too. In a market flooded with applications, reviewing resumes, coordinating interviews, and trying to make the right call under pressure can be overwhelming. The emotional toll of rejecting dozens—sometimes hundreds—of candidates while trying to find "the one" is real.

And in a world marching toward automation, where AI sorts resumes and coding tests are auto-graded, it's even more urgent to ask: How do we keep this process human?

The answer lies in intentional design—creating systems that honor both the people applying and the people hiring. Systems that reflect values, not just velocity.

1.1 Why This Matters to Me

I’ve had interviews that gave me full-blown anxiety attacks—not because I wasn’t prepared, but because the setup was completely misaligned. One interviewer steamrolled the conversation. Another asked vague questions with no structure, leaving me spiraling. In one case, I left the call and cried.

I was interviewing for a role I was qualified for, during a time of personal and professional upheaval—post-layoff, with limited time to prepare, and every bit of emotional energy stretched thin. That experience didn’t reveal my strengths. It revealed how broken our hiring systems can be.

When you’re laid off, already navigating uncertainty, and then thrown into a high-stakes interview with someone who doesn’t know how to meet you where you are—it’s a recipe for panic, not performance.

Right now, thousands of incredibly talented engineers are navigating the job market after being laid off—not because of performance, but because of funding shifts, mergers, or company strategy pivots. The emotional toll is real. And yet the hiring process often treats these candidates like they have something to prove.

As someone who’s hired, been hired and laid off —I know we can do better. I’ve led hiring loops across both enterprise and startup environments, from scaling fast-moving teams to shaping more formal hiring processes. I’ve sat on both sides of the table—and seen firsthand what works and what breaks people down.

2. What’s Broken Today (and How It Hurts Everyone)

"Most hiring loops are designed to extract signal, but end up amplifying anxiety."

• Overused, generic questions that test for memorization, not impact
• The endless LeetCode grind that screens for algorithm trivia over practical thinking
• Endless interview loops with little structure or signal
• Untrained interviewers, inconsistent feedback, and unclear rubrics
• A lack of empathy, especially toward candidates navigating a layoff
• Leadership interviews that reward performance anxiety over clarity and depth

“You can solve three hard LeetCode problems in 90 minutes and still struggle to navigate a legacy system with five teams involved. We’re screening for the wrong things.”

These flaws hit laid-off candidates the hardest. They’re already in a vulnerable position, and instead of building confidence, the current process often chips away at it.

According to Stanford’s Institute for Economic Policy Research, mass layoffs have long-term effects, including wage depression and reduced bargaining power for all workers—not just those let go. These high-stakes transitions deserve hiring processes that rebuild trust—not diminish it.

3. A Better Process: Thoughtful, Human, and Signal-Rich

Let’s design a hiring process that actually reflects the job—and respects the human. One that’s structured enough to produce signal, flexible enough to meet candidates where they are, and grounded in the realities of real-world engineering.

Here’s a structure I advocate for:

1. Hiring Manager Conversation

Start with trust. This first round should focus on understanding the candidate’s journey—what they’ve built, what energizes them, and how they think about leadership or ownership. For laid-off candidates especially, this is a chance to reconnect with their strengths and vision. It’s also the manager’s opportunity to be transparent about team needs, challenges, and growth paths.

2. Cross-Functional Panel Interview

Great engineers don’t just ship code—they collaborate. This round brings in folks from design, product, or data to evaluate cross-functional communication and alignment. Can the candidate explain technical choices clearly? Can they balance priorities and navigate ambiguity with teammates who have different incentives?

3. Working Session / Technical Design Round

Ditch the whiteboard puzzles. Invite the candidate to walk through a past system or pair on a hypothetical design. You’re looking for technical reasoning, tradeoff awareness, and clarity of thought—not perfection. This can also be a strong space to simulate debugging, architectural choices, or scaling scenarios relevant to your domain.

4. Candidate-Led Conversation with a Teammate

This is a chance for the candidate to explore the team dynamic on their own terms. Let them ask anything: how decisions get made, how feedback is handled, what a normal day looks like. It flips the script and gives them a feel for the people they’d actually work with. Ideally, this is an unstructured, no-rubric conversation that builds authentic connection and transparency. 

"66% of job seekers say the hiring experience influences their decision to accept a role, and 26% have declined offers due to poor hiring experiences." — CareerPlug

4. Better Rubrics = Better Decisions

Hiring breaks down without a shared definition of what “good” looks like. Vague notes like “smart” or “strong communicator” don’t cut it. We need rubrics that are:

• Aligned with actual job expectations, not trivia
• Calibrated to the level of the role
• Actionable and repeatable across interviewers

Here’s how I break it down:

For Entry-Level Engineers

• Foundational knowledge: Do they understand basic coding concepts, tools, and version control?
• Learning mindset: Are they curious, receptive to feedback, and willing to ask questions?
• Communication: Can they articulate their thought process clearly, even if the solution isn’t perfect?
• Collaboration: Do they show potential to work well on a team, even with limited experience?

For Mid-Level Engineers

• Technical depth: Can they navigate a moderately complex system and debug effectively?
• Collaboration: Do they ask clarifying questions? Do they communicate tradeoffs clearly with peers?
• Execution: Do they break down tasks well and manage scope independently?
• Growth mindset: Are they open to feedback and new approaches?

For Senior Engineers

• System design: Can they architect components that scale? Are they thoughtful about performance and edge cases?
• Leadership within the team: Do they mentor others, lead by influence, and spot risks early?
• Cross-functional impact: Can they translate technical goals to product and design partners?
• Decision-making: Do they show clear rationale and humility in uncertain situations?

For Engineering Managers

• Team development: Have they grown people or helped others succeed?
• Execution management: Can they align priorities, navigate trade-offs, and deliver?
• Psychological safety: Do they create inclusive spaces and handle conflict with care?
• Strategy: Can they translate company goals into engineering outcomes?

Rubrics shouldn’t be secret or abstract—they should guide both interviewers and candidates toward alignment.

“Great interviews aren't about passing a test. They're about uncovering whether this person will thrive on your team—and how your team can support them.”

Lastly, invest in interviewer training and reverse shadowing. A great process is only as strong as the people running it.

Globally, 64% of IT recruiters say they struggle to find qualified candidates (Statista)—yet we keep defaulting to broken processes that miss high-potential talent.

5. Leadership Interviews Deserve Better

For EM/Director-level roles, we need to:

• Send behavioral prompts ahead of time so candidates can share meaningful stories—not just whatever comes to mind under pressure.
• Focus on systems thinking, team dynamics, and resilience—not buzzwords or executive polish.
• Avoid coding challenges for leadership roles. These individuals are not hired to be the top coders on the team—they’re hired to develop people, navigate ambiguity, shape culture, and drive outcomes across functions. If you must assess technical credibility, use architecture discussions or past project walkthroughs—not live coding.

Especially for laid-off leaders, this honors the weight of their past experience—while giving them a fair chance to show up with clarity and confidence.

"Being a strong leader isn’t about charisma in a 45-minute interview. It’s about how you show up consistently when things are messy."

6. Final Thoughts

Hiring is never just about filling roles—it’s about building trust, aligning values, and investing in the future of your team. Whether you're hiring in a time of growth or navigating through layoffs, the process should reflect empathy, clarity, and purpose.

A layoff doesn’t mean someone isn’t talented. It means the company changed. And often, it means the person has weathered tough environments and grown from them.

We may not be able to fix the entire system overnight—but we can take ownership of how we hire, one thoughtful step at a time.

I’d love to hear from you: Do you agree with this approach to hiring? What would you add, change, or challenge? Whether you’re a candidate, hiring manager, or someone in between—your experience matters.

Drop your thoughts in the comments or reach out directly. Let’s make the system better—together. DMs open. 💬