Mastering the Hiring Process: Crafting the Dream Team

This article is part of my series on building a top-notch professional services team.

Away from technical questions — what traits are you looking for, and how can you actually find them? These are my tips and tricks for the hiring process!

It starts with choosing the programming language and platform the candidate should know, as covered in a previous article. We also asked team members if someone would switch to that new platform or programming language. If we didn't have qualified internal candidates, we hired externally.

With hiring the team, we did many valuable things during the interview to try and determine seniority. Defining seniority, from junior to technical managers and architects, involves assessing technical skills, managerial skills, troubleshooting skills, etc.

The interview typically lasted 1 to 1.5 hours. We made sure to inform candidates to block 2 hours of their time for the interview. It was usually divided into three parts:

• The first part is to check seniority level through soft skills, troubleshooting skills, etc.
• The second part is for technical assessment.
• The third part is for ramp-up, feedback, and recommendations.

At the interview's introduction, we first asked if the candidate would like a drink or how their journey to the office was. Then, we introduced ourselves, our company, and the team the candidate would potentially join — all within 5 minutes. We clarified that our questions would be straightforward, without word puzzles or double meanings. When asked to make choices, we assured them their decisions wouldn't affect our evaluation unless stated otherwise. We outlined the dos and don'ts, such as encouraging them to admit if they didn't know an answer and encouraging them to 'think logically'.

We typically started the interview with questions about the best project they ever worked on and why it was the best. The answers to this question revealed much about the candidate's preferences and truthfulness. In addition, it made it clear to us where they are at the maturity level. We would ask a couple of other questions about the why to make sure it is clear to us.

The next question usually involved a business problem, starting with something ambiguous, like 'The client asked us to create a news module; what shall we do?' The candidate's response demonstrated their seniority level, with more senior candidates asking clarifying questions to suggest a more precise solution — like how many end users, when should it be delivered, etc. Also how complete the presented solution is; all of them helped to see where they are on the seniority scale.

During the technical interview, we presented the areas they would be questioned on and let them choose which area they felt most comfortable starting with. This choice didn't affect their score or our perspective. We had a set of questions for each area, starting from junior level and drilling down as much as possible until they admitted, 'I don't know'. This approach helped us gauge their depth of technical knowledge, hence technical seniority, and their honesty when unsure of an answer.

We concluded the technical questions by asking, 'Tell me the hardest three technical questions you can think of that you know the answers to.' This not only covered areas we might not have addressed but also revealed the challenging problems the candidate had faced, reflecting on their troubleshooting, diversity in work experience, seniority, etc. If it is an interesting question, we asked them to answer it.

After this, we moved on to non-technical problems that didn't have a correct answer, such as estimating the number of basketballs in the country. The answers to these questions showcased the candidate's troubleshooting and logical thinking skills; we got the most amazing and the most interesting answers to questions like this.

The goal wasn't just answering questions; it was to understand how candidates think. We encouraged them to think out loud and reassured them that their thought process was more important than their answers. This approach encouraged candidates to open up, and if they were stuck, we would simplify the question until they found an answer. This method was crucial in assessing their level of seniority, critical thinking, problem-solving, etc.

At the end of each question or section, if a candidate answered a question incorrectly, we would provide the correct answer and discuss it. This feedback loop refined our questioning technique and helped candidates understand where they might improve.

Usually, candidates would leave saying, 'This is the most interesting and unusual interview I've ever had, and I am really eager to work in your team.' We ended by asking if they had any questions, often addressing their performance and explaining our point-based evaluation system. We didn't have an accept/reject mindset; the candidate with the highest points and deemed to have the necessary soft skills was offered the position. We often provided unsuccessful candidates with recommendations on areas to improve, encouraging them to reapply in the future.

Before offering a position, we set clear expectations. For instance, we informed the Xamarin team about the potential need to switch to backend development due to the uncertain pipeline for mobile development projects. This transparency reduced friction when changes occurred. We also considered team dynamics — hiring two best friends for a challenging project part, and ensuring they were prepared for the collaboration ahead. This clarity in our process and future-building plans helped us form a cohesive team with shared goals and non-conflicting dreams.

Post Hiring

We fostered knowledge sharing among team members and across teams, encouraging them to explore new techniques or technologies and share their findings in brief sessions. Managers also contributed with insights on pricing methods, market trends, etc., fueling team spirit.

We supported innovation, allowing team members to try new methods with the understanding that if the new approach exceeded the traditional time frame, extra effort would be required. This policy was generally well-received and led to valuable shared learning.

Incentives were team-based, with competencies partly tied to role requirements and partly to individual goals. Individual goals were aligned with company needs and the employee's personal five-year vision. We occasionally rotated roles among senior members to provide a sense of leadership, maintaining a supportive and collaborative development cycle.

In conclusion, our interview process and team management strategies were tailored to build a harmonious team aligned with our company's vision and each member's career aspirations, fostering a cooperative and forward-thinking work environment.

Where Taqdim fits

A hiring process that gives every candidate feedback — even a "no" with advice — is rare, and it tells you what the company will be like to work for. Taqdim helps you spot the roles and teams worth that effort before you apply. Taqdim is in closed beta. Join the waitlist.

---

Originally published on Medium on 6 Feb 2024.