You now need to do 15% better in technical interviews than you did at the start of 2022 (and the bar will keep rising).

interviewing.io is a technical mock interview platform and technical recruiting marketplace, so we have a ton of useful data around technical interviewing and hiring. One of the most useful pieces of data in the current climate is the ever-changing technical interview bar – throughout 2022, it’s gotten progressively harder to pass technical interviews, and it’s only going to keep getting harder… because employers are gaining more leverage in the market. 

One might say that because we’re a mock interview platform, publishing this post is self-serving. The reality is that we take no joy in this content. Ever since hiring freezes and layoffs have started dominating the news cycle, we’ve lost about half of our interview volume, many of the prominent employers who were hiring through us as recently as Q2 of this year have paused. So, trust us, we’d much rather be writing about something else while living in a hiring boom. And look, whether we want to see it or not or whether we have vested interest in publishing it or not, the data is the data, and the data doesn’t care. Realistically, neither will the employers who are still interviewing and hiring.

We hope that what we’re about to share will help you enter an increasingly unforgiving labor market, the likes of which engineers haven’t seen since the early 2000s, with your eyes wide open.

The state of the world

Despite not wanting to believe it (as Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”), I’m coming around to the idea that engineers are going to lose significant leverage in the market.

Tech jobs are shrinking, and the number of unemployed engineers is growing

In the graph above, the blue line is the number of open tech jobs, according to TrueUp. TrueUp is a tech job index and layoff tracker, started by Amit Taylor. One of its limitations is that it tracks jobs at somewhat arbitrarily defined “tech” companies and excludes jobs (even if they’re technical) at non-tech companies (e.g. Walmart… their example, not ours). However, it’s the best aggregation of open jobs over time that I’ve been able to find, and I think it’s as good a proxy as any.

The red line comes from our own analysis of tech layoffs (it’s on its own axis because the blue line represents the number of open tech jobs across all disciplines, whereas the red line is engineers only). We recently looked at layoff lists on layoffs.fyi, tagged them by function, and did some corrections for how likely people in different functions were to opt in to those lists. We ultimately learned that engineers comprised about 5% of total layoffs overall (though eng departments were hit harder than we expected, and at companies that did layoffs, about 12% of the eng team was let go). As such, we counted up total layoffs in the US by month and took 5% of that.

TL;DR The number of open jobs is shrinking, and the number of unemployed engineers is growing.

How much will this actually affect hiring practices and how high the bar will actually get?

It’s hard to say, and I’m not an economist, but I do run an eng hiring marketplace, and we have some proprietary data I’d like to share with you all.

The rising eng bar

interviewing.io is both a mock interview platform and an eng hiring marketplace – engineers use us for technical interview practice, and top performers get fast-tracked at companies. 

Companies can actually interview our top performers anonymously, right on our platform, and leave feedback after each interview. If the candidate passes, they unmask and move to the next step (typically an onsite). Feedback is both quantitative and qualitative, and in addition to telling us if the candidate passed, companies also rate them on technical ability, communication ability, and problem solving ability. Technical ability is the most predictive and is therefore weighed the most heavily in our scoring system.

While we’re not contractually allowed to list publicly which companies hire through us, it’s historically been a mix of FAANGs, FAANG-adjacent top tier companies (e.g. ride sharing, file sharing), and up and coming startups. That is to say that we’re confident that our data about the eng bar is indeed representative of what’s happening at the top end of the market.
To figure out where the bar is and how it’s changed, we averaged the technical scores for successful interviews among senior engineers1 over the last few quarters and graphed it against TrueUp’s number of open tech jobs (same as the blue line in the graph above). Below, you can see the results. The shape of the 2 curves surprised us in its uncanniness. Since January of 2022, after a brief rise in Q2, tech jobs have contracted by 40%. At the same time, after a brief dip in Q2, the bar for a successful technical interview has increased by 10 percentile points (or by about 15%).2

The engineering bar keeps rising, as the number of open tech jobs shrinks

The interviewing.io technical interview bar index

Here’s our quantification of where the “eng bar” is. We’ll call it the interviewing.io technical interview bar index (ITIB index). We used historical data to measure the link between the number of open tech jobs and the typical performance of people who cleared a real technical interview on our platform. As the plot above shows, it’s a negative relationship: when the job pool shrinks, candidates have to perform better in technical interviews.

Our regression estimates show that for every 50K drop in tech jobs, candidates need to perform about 3 percentiles higher in interviews. Given the almost halving of jobs that has happened so far in 2022, candidates went from needing to beat about two thirds of candidates who had also gotten to the phone screen stage to needing to beat more than three quarters.

One caveat to this approach is that interviewing.io probably doesn’t represent the whole eng market for 2 reasons: selection bias among employers and selection bias among candidates. As I mentioned earlier, the employers who hire through us tend to have a high bar and conduct a specific kind of interview (typically algorithmic in the phone screen). Moreover, only people who do really well in mock interviews get to the point where they can talk to real companies, so these percentiles are comparing people who are already very strong performers to one another rather than to everyone in the pool. However, because they’re relative rather than absolute, we feel reasonably confident that these numbers can be generalized to the overall hiring market.

The ITIB index captures this in a single number, measuring the current technical bar in percentile terms. If it’s at 40, you need to be better than 40% of engineers to get a Yes. Right now, it’s at 78, up from 68 in Q1 of 2022.

We’ll be tracking this index on a monthly basis on Twitter. Follow us at @interviewingio.

  1. We just looked at senior engineers here because our average user is senior (~7 years of experience), and so that’s where we have the most consistent data.
  2. In the graph called, “The eng bar keeps rising…”, we chose to show raw scores rather than percentiles so that our users could benchmark their scores easily. However, because our raw scores likely don’t mean anything to the general public, we recomputed them as percentiles for the technical interview bar index. Also note that if you try to compute the % difference from the raw scores, you’ll get a lower number, but that’s not the right way to approach it because small differences in code scores amount to big differences in engineer ranking.

6 thoughts on “You now need to do 15% better in technical interviews than you did at the start of 2022 (and the bar will keep rising).”

  1. Why should we play your stupid games ? We are currently IN jobs doing WORK. Work for which we have to write code that works in PRODUCTION. And because we move from another job to another one, suddenly we have to PROVE with stupid jump through loops games that we are COMPETENT ?

    Do you ask that bullshit from surgeons and most professions ? No you dont.

    I will not play your stupid games. Been programming since I’m 8. I have OVER 40 years of programming this year. Used Basic, assembly on dozens of hardware platforms. C, C++, C#, Rust, Java, Go, Lisp, etc. Build hundreds of backends and well over a dozen frontends. And I would need to play your ridiculous games for what ? Show I can do my JOB I have already been doing for over 30 years with success on each ?

    You are useless. You are even more stupid than the morons trying to recruit us and they don’t even know how to do their own jobs properly and think they can judge us.

    Only morons use interviews. Only suckers play them.

    If you think the best jobs at the biggest companies are gotten through interviews with such games, you are fools. For those jobs, programmers recommand other programmers. It’s all vetting. Network and relations.

    1. I’ve been a software engineer for the past 13 years. I started my own business out of college. At the beginning of this year I decided I want to join a big tech firm so that I can work on a team of talented developers and learn from others.

      At first I shared your sentiment regarding technical interviews: why would I write code on a whiteboard? That’s not how I’ve ever coded and that’s not how anyone in software engineering works. After 6 months worth of a deep dive into Data Structures & Algorithms, I can now tell you that I’ve learned so much and I really enjoy the exercise. I look at my day to day work differently: time and space complexity are considered in every API function I write now and having a stronger understanding of data structures has expanded my toolset.

      At the end of the day, I think the process is way more than simply competency and ability: it’s about a candidate having the discipline to study, the communication skills to collaborate with the interviewer and the problem solving ability to break down complex problems into smaller solvable problems to find an optimal solution. ❤️

      1. After attempting to get into FAANG companies this past year, failing, and eventually burning out, I’ve become frustrated by the process. I do see the value in considering time and space complexities when writing code, but I don’t see how my day-to-day work is improving my interviewing skills. If I were to attempt another FAANG-style interview, I would still have to do a lot of studying and prep to stand a chance.

        It just feels defeating knowing that nearly none of what I did professionally is going to be applicable to the majority of the interview process and probably fail. Perhaps I’m just easily discouraged, but with other obligations in my life, it would be hard to do another cycle of prep for yet another failure.

      2. Thanks for sharing your story and for jumping in. It sucks. We hear a lot of stories like this… and I’m really conflicted about how interviewing works. On one hand, I firmly believe that you should be able to code in an interview if you’re an engineer and reason about time and space complexity. That’s table stakes.

        On the other hand, an interview is supposed to be a collaborative experience that tries to establish if the interviewer and the interviewee can be smart together. That’s not how it plays out in most cases, and interview prep has been taken to an extreme in recent years (which we’ve benefitted from but don’t feel great about).

        At the end of the day, I think the key to making interviews not suck is having great interviewers who are engaged and are willing to suss out if a person can solve problems with some input and constraint variation, rather than if they’ve memorized a bunch of stuff.

    2. Fortunately the technical interview is not the only criteria. A leetcode champ fresh out of school will not be granted staff eng role simply because they can do multidimensional dynamic programming

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top