Hiring Engineers

Bartram says companies differ in what they consider a good engineer. A startup should identify what is holding it back and decide whether it needs, for example, practical productivity or stronger computer science and problem-solving skills. Interviews can become biased toward the interviewer’s own strengths, so teams should choose deliberately what they assess.

Bartram argues that real-world experience matters more than whether someone came from a boot camp or a CS program. Interviews measure solving small problems quickly, while engineering jobs often require owning large, evolving projects. He says résumés can lower the hiring bar for experienced candidates, even when their interview performance is weaker.

Triplebyte separately assesses programming productivity, computer science knowledge, debugging, and system design in roughly two hours. Bartram says easier programming tasks, such as building a basic checkers game, can predict engineering skill more reliably than harder algorithm puzzles, which bring more false negatives. He also describes substantial disagreement between companies interviewing the same candidates.

Bartram says trial employment can reveal more than a short interview, but it deters candidates who cannot leave a job or have many options. For interviews, he recommends asking candidates the same questions and evaluating them consistently, then improving the process using results. He also advises limiting panels to two interviewers and training interviewers to give help consistently.

The host warns that interviews can become hazing when interviewers use hostile questions or react with frustration. Bartram advises against cutting interviews short unless the candidate is in pain, since doing so can damage the company’s reputation. When a candidate is unlikely to pass, he suggests switching from evaluation to clearly and kindly explaining the problem.