As an Engineering Manager at a startup, I am responsible for vetting new candidates for my team. Our engineers conduct interviews and submit performance feedback into our recruiting tool. I’ve noticed a significant variation in the quality of feedback provided by different interviewers. Some submit detailed assessments, while others offer brief, high-level comments that provide limited insight. Even when feedback is detailed, it often focuses too narrowly on the coding exercise, failing to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the candidate’s overall performance and potential.

This observation led me to consider the importance of providing valuable and well-rounded engineering interview feedback. Upon investigation, I learned that our company lacked official guidelines for this process. Moreover, I couldn’t find readily usable templates or guidelines online that I could share with my team. Most resources centered on how to provide feedback to the candidate, rather than internal feedback for managers and recruiters.

Disclaimer

The advice presented here stems from my personal work experiences and does not represent my employer’s official guidelines. These recommendations reflect my individual perspective and are intended as a guide for my team and others in similar roles, independent of any specific company policies.

An Example of Unhelpful Feedback

To illustrate the issue, let’s examine an example of unhelpful interview feedback (fictitious but, based on real feedback patterns I have observed):

The candidate completed most of the exercise. Their performance was satisfactory and they demonstrated good knowledge of React. Got started quickly but got stuck implementing the useEffect. It took them a few minutes to understand what was wrong but they eventually figured it out and continued working on the exercise. Although they did not complete the exercise, I believe they could have done so with an extra 15 minutes. I would recommend we advance them to the next round.

While this feedback provides some insights, it raises more questions than it answers. What does “satisfactory performance” mean? How strong are their fundamentals? Do they have experience with other frameworks? How did they debug the useEffect issue? Did they pepper the codebase with console.log() statements or did they use the debugger? Are they familiar with their tools, IDE, etc.? How did they architect the solution? I can keep going.

The Broader Role of an Engineer

Before we get into what constitutes helpful feedback, it’s important to understand the multifaceted role of an engineer. Beyond writing code, engineers are expected to:

• Communicate effectively with other engineers, designers, product managers, and stakeholders
• Assist in architecting codebases (primarily for senior developers)
• Represent the team in various conversations and meetings
• Understand and resolve time-sensitive bugs
• Write documentation for internal and external use
• Mentor junior developers
• Participate in interviewing new candidates
• Stay updated with industry trends and best practices

Given the breadth of these responsibilities, interview feedback must provide sufficient insights to determine if a candidate is capable of meeting these diverse expectations.

Spotting Great Candidates: Key Questions

Keeping in mind the comprehensive nature of an engineer’s role, here are the key questions your feedback should address:

• Are the candidate’s fundamental skills strong? This is especially important in the age of AI-assisted programming.
• Does their performance align with expectations for someone at their experience level?
• How did they approach problem-solving?
• How effectively did they manage time and perform under pressure?
• How well did they structure their code?
• What methods did they use to debug issues or overcome obstacles?
• How comfortable were they with their development environment?
• How effectively did they communicate? Did they ask meaningful questions and provide clear responses?
• Can you see yourself working with this person on a daily basis? Will they fit in with the rest of the team? What new skills and knowledge do they bring to the team?
• What areas could the candidate improve upon?
• Do they have additional interests or methods for staying current in their field?

Let’s Improve our Previous Example

While it may not be feasible to expect lengthy, detailed feedback after each interview, it is possible to answer most of these questions concisely in about 10 bullet points. With practice, observing and noting these qualities becomes more intuitive.

Here’s an example of more helpful feedback:

Pros:

• Demonstrated strong knowledge of fundamental front-end concepts. Has experience with React and previously built production applications with Angular. Contributed to their company’s component library. Experience aligns with senior developer expectations.
• Created well-structured components to isolate logic. Effectively utilized props and relevant React hooks. Code was clean and easily readable.
• Arrived well-prepared with an efficiently configured IDE setup. Used a zsh alias to spin up new React project with CRA. Used a VSCode extension to quickly generate React boilerplate code. Zipped through the setup process.
• Communicated clearly and provided straightforward answers to questions. Demonstrated confidence in responses.

Cons:

• Did not complete the entire exercise, though their progress suggests they likely would have finished with an additional 15 minutes.
• Did not discuss their approach or plan before beginning the exercise. Could have potentially avoided some issues by outlining their solution in advance.
• Encountered difficulties implementing a useEffect hook. Relied heavily on console.log() statements for debugging. Could have made better use of the browser’s debugger and other dev tools.

Overall, a strong candidate. During the final 5-minute Q&A, they expressed interest in new opportunities due to limited growth potential in their current role. Currently mentors junior developers. Recommendation: Advance to the next round.

This revised feedback provides a more comprehensive view of the candidate’s abilities and potential fit within the team. It also provides enough detail to help recruiters fine tune their search for other candidates. While it may appear more detailed, with practice, this type of feedback can typically be composed in about 10 minutes.

Conclusion

Providing valuable engineering interview feedback is crucial for making informed hiring decisions and building strong teams. By focusing on a candidate’s overall capabilities and potential, rather than solely on their coding skills, we can gain a more holistic understanding of their suitability for the role.

What strategies do you find most effective for providing helpful engineering interview feedback? Share your thoughts over at HackerNews.

Shameless Plug: If you’re interested in joining a dynamic team of rockstar engineers, we’re hiring! Check out our careers page for more information.