Zaemis

Continuing my reflections on how we can better hire software engineers, I'd like to next address the topic of coding interviews. They're a cornerstone of the interview process for software engineers and take many forms, including algorithm challenges, whiteboard sessions, and take-home exercises. On the surface, the practice sounds reasonable. If we're going to pay someone to write code for us, we should verify they know how to program, right? The core problem is that coding interviews focus on superficial indicators of skill rather than the qualities that matter in real-world engineering. They're a tradition that persists not because it works, but because it feels like we're doing something rigorous. Meanwhile, engineers are increasingly refusing to participate, leaving us with a less diverse talent pool. So, if coding interviews frustrate the very people we want to hire, and they don’t generate the insights we actually need, why are we still doing them? It’s ...

I saw a recent post where a software engineer/programming influencer was encouraging: If you know how to work with C#, you can learn Java. If you know how to work with JavaScript, you can learn TypeScript. If you know how to work with GitHub Actions, you can learn Jenkins. If you know how to work with SQL, you can learn SparkSQL. If you know how to work with Angular, you can learn React. If you know how to work with Databricks, you can learn Snowflake. If you know how to work with Event Hubs, you can learn Kafka. If you know how to work with Bicep, you can learn Terraform. It's not the tools that are important, it's the concepts. Kudos for speaking the truth. With 20 years of experience in software engineering myself, I whole heartedly agree with her post. But sadly, the market doesn’t value conceptual fluency. From a job search perspective, conceptual fluency presumes you're networking and already in contact with the hiring manager, they like you, and the...

Interviews are supposed to evaluate whether a candidate can do the job. All too often, though, they become tests of endurance, performance, or obedience. And some of the most common interview questions aren’t just unhelpful, rather lazy, intrusive, and manipulative, reflecting a deeper problem in how companies approach hiring. If we want real insight, we have to ask insightful questions. That sounds obvious, but it’s staggering how many interviews still fall back on unhelpful lines of questioning. You’ve invested hours wading through half-baked applications, irrelevant referrals, and now AI slop. After all that effort, why would you waste the actual interview, the most valuable moment, with questions that produce rehearsed answers and zero useful insight? Let’s look at four of the worst interview questions to ask, not just to call them out, but to push for a smarter, more respectful way of interviewing that both values people and leads to better hiring decisions. 1. Can you explai...