1. Mismatch between experience and interview format
One of the primary complaints senior engineers have about coding interviews is that they often focus on algorithmic questions that are rarely relevant to their daily work. Questions involving complex data structures, dynamic programming, or solving obscure algorithm puzzles seem disconnected from the reality of building and shipping software products.
Why this is a problem:
Senior engineers have typically moved beyond writing individual lines of code; they spend more time on high-level architecture, design decisions, team mentoring, and stakeholder communication.
They often focus on solving problems at scale, refactoring legacy systems, and optimizing processes. These are skills that are rarely tested in coding interviews.
The questions asked in coding interviews can feel more appropriate for new graduates or those fresh from competitive programming backgrounds, not seasoned engineers whose expertise lies in real-world problem-solving.
2. Time constraints do not reflect real-world work
Coding interviews are often conducted under strict time limits, pressuring candidates to produce perfect solutions within 30 to 45 minutes. This rush to perform can feel unrealistic and misaligned with how engineers actually work in a professional setting.
Why is this a problem?
In their jobs, senior engineers have time to research, discuss, and deliberate on solutions before implementation. They can afford to look at problems from multiple angles, consult colleagues, and test hypotheses—none of which is possible in a timed interview.
The time pressure leads to performance anxiety, which can overshadow a senior engineer’s true capabilities. The stress of delivering under the clock does not reflect their actual work environment, where quality and strategic thinking are valued more.
3. Focus on syntax over strategy
Coding interviews often emphasize writing perfect syntax without access to an IDE, linting tools, or documentation. This setup feels artificial and disconnected from how engineers write and test code in real projects.
Why is this a problem?
Senior engineers use tools that enhance productivity and accuracy, such as version control, code editors, and CI/CD pipelines. The emphasis on remembering syntax or manually debugging code on a whiteboard feels like an unnecessary test of rote memorization rather than strategic thinking.
In real-world applications, syntax errors are quickly identified and corrected with tools, allowing engineers to focus on solving the bigger picture, something that interviews rarely allow for.
4. Underestimating soft skills and leadership abilities
Senior engineers bring more to the table than just coding prowess. They have honed skills in leadership, project management, team collaboration, and cross-functional communication. Yet, many coding interviews fail to assess these crucial skills.
Why is this a problem?
The value of senior engineers often lies in their ability to lead teams, mentor junior developers, and make strategic decisions that align with business goals. However, these aspects are largely ignored in a coding interview format focused purely on technical problems.
Interviewers may overlook a candidate’s potential as a mentor, decision-maker, or team player simply because they didn’t excel in algorithmic challenges. This narrow assessment misses out on the holistic qualities that make senior engineers invaluable to an organization.
5. Unrealistic problem scenarios
Many coding interviews present problems that are complex and unrealistic in a real-world context. Problems like solving LeetCode hard-level puzzles or implementing obscure algorithms from scratch are not reflective of the day-to-day work engineers do, especially at the senior level.
Why is this a problem?
Senior engineers spend more time solving practical challenges like refactoring old code, dealing with technical debt, optimizing existing solutions, and making architectural decisions, not crafting solutions to esoteric problems with little practical application.
This disconnect can lead to frustration, as senior candidates feel that the interview does not measure what truly matters: their ability to drive results in complex, dynamic work environments.
6. Bias toward younger, competitive programmers
The coding interview format is often seen as biased toward younger candidates who are fresh from academia or with competitive programming backgrounds. Senior engineers, who may not have practiced such problems for years, can feel disadvantaged.
Why is this a problem?
The emphasis on competitive programming questions caters to a specific skill set rather than a broad range of experience. It can inadvertently favor those who have recently prepared for such challenges over those with years of practical industry experience.
Senior engineers may feel that their years of experience are undervalued and that the interview process unfairly penalizes them for not keeping up with algorithmic trivia that isn’t used in their daily work.
7. Lack of respect for experience and past achievements
Another central pain point is that coding interviews often fail to respect or acknowledge the years of experience and achievements that senior engineers bring to the table. They can feel as if they are being judged solely on their ability to solve a few arbitrary problems, rather than on their proven track record.
Why is this a problem?
Senior engineers have built careers on successful projects, often overcoming complex challenges that a coding interview cannot capture. The focus on isolated problem-solving during an interview can dismiss their broader contributions.
This leads to a sense of disconnect and disillusionment, as candidates feel that their past successes are overshadowed by a format that doesn’t recognize the depth and breadth of their skills.
How can the industry improve coding interviews for senior engineers?
Incorporate real-world problem-solving: Replace contrived algorithmic questions with scenarios that mimic real-world challenges, such as debugging an existing system, designing an architecture, or discussing trade-offs in a past project.
Focus on system design and leadership questions: Emphasize interviews that test system design, architecture decisions, leadership experiences, and other high-level skills relevant to senior roles.
Allow for more discussion and collaboration: Interviews should provide room for debate, brainstorming, and collaborative problem-solving, reflecting how engineers work.
Evaluate soft skills and decision-making: Introduce assessments that focus on soft skills, strategic thinking, and leadership abilities, especially for senior roles that involve team management.
Respect experience and adapt the interview format: Acknowledge candidates’ backgrounds and adapt the interview process to better suit experienced engineers, perhaps even skipping technical rounds that feel irrelevant.
Cracking the Coding Interview: Best Tips to Get Prepared
Conclusion
The frustration of senior engineers with coding interviews often stems from a disconnect between the skills assessed and the skills needed on the job.
The tech industry needs to evolve its interview practices to better reflect the realities of senior-level work, ensuring that interviews are not just a test of coding but also a measure of a candidate’s ability to lead, innovate, and contribute strategically.
By doing so, companies can not only attract more experienced talent but also create a hiring process that values and respects the depth of knowledge that senior engineers bring to the table.
