How to Evaluate Software Engineering Talent: A Guide for HR Leaders

One of the biggest challenges I see in software engineering hiring isn’t a lack of information about candidates. It’s knowing which information actually matters. 

HR leaders should evaluate software engineering talent by identifying the capabilities required for the role, determining what evidence would demonstrate those capabilities, and creating an interview process that evaluates that evidence consistently. 

Resumes, GitHub portfolios, interviews, and technical assessments all provide useful signals, but none tells the whole story. From my perspective, working with hiring managers and technology leaders, effective software engineering hiring starts by defining the capabilities the organization needs and then determining what evidence will demonstrate them. 

A strong hiring process should not focus only on finding the person whose background most closely matches a job description. It should be designed to determine whether a candidate has the capabilities required to succeed in the role. 

I think of it as:

Are We Measuring the Right Things When Evaluating Software Engineering Talent? 

Years of experience, previous titles, technical skills, certifications, and industry experience provide useful context. The problem comes when those signals become substitutes for capability. 

Five years with a framework does not automatically demonstrate strong engineering judgment. A candidate who lacks experience with one tool may have the foundation to learn it quickly. Experience at a recognizable company does not guarantee success in a different engineering environment. 

HR can help hiring managers clarify what the organization actually needs before assumptions become requirements. Ask: 

• What will this engineer be expected to accomplish? 
• Which capabilities are essential on day one? 
• Which skills can reasonably be learned? 
• What decisions will this person need to make? 
• What will successful performance look like? 

Broadening how you evaluate candidates does not mean lowering the hiring bar. It means making the bar more intentional. 

What Separates Technical Qualifications From Engineering Capability? 

Technical knowledge is foundational, but knowing a language, framework, or platform is different from knowing how to apply it effectively. 

Depending on the role, hiring teams should look for evidence of: 

• Problem-solving: Working through unfamiliar or ambiguous challenges 
• Technical judgment: Evaluating options and tradeoffs 
• Adaptability: Learning as technologies and requirements change 
• Collaboration: Working effectively across technical and business teams 
• Business understanding: Connecting engineering decisions to organizational needs 

These capabilities become increasingly important as responsibilities grow. Senior engineers may need to influence architecture, communicate risk, mentor others, and make consequential technology decisions. 

Communication Is Part of Technical Credibility 

Communication is often categorized as a soft skill, but in software engineering it is closely connected to technical effectiveness. Engineers need to clarify requirements, document decisions, explain limitations, and communicate tradeoffs. 

HR leaders do not need to judge whether a candidate selected the perfect architecture. They can listen for whether the candidate clearly explains why they made a decision, what alternatives they considered, and what constraints influenced them. That provides insight into how someone thinks and collaborates without asking HR to make technical judgments. 

What Can Resumes and GitHub Portfolios Tell Employers? 

A resume can show career progression, responsibilities, technical environments, and accomplishments. What it cannot fully demonstrate is how someone thinks or applies that experience. 

Keyword alignment can help during screening, but knowing that someone has used AWS, Python, Kubernetes, or React tells you less than understanding what they accomplished with those technologies. 

Look for evidence of problems solved, scope of responsibility, decisions influenced, improvements made, and business or user outcomes. A missing preferred technology does not necessarily represent a meaningful capability gap if the candidate has relevant transferable experience. 

Use GitHub as Evidence, Not a Requirement 

GitHub and technical portfolios can provide another perspective when public work is available. Before reviewing one, decide what you are trying to learn. Are you evaluating coding fundamentals, documentation, technical decisions, or problem-solving? 

Look beyond project complexity. Consider the problem the engineer was solving, why they chose an approach, the tradeoffs they made, and what they learned. 

Not every strong engineer has public work to share. Many experienced professionals build proprietary systems, so GitHub should be one possible source of evidence rather than a universal measure of engineering ability. 

How Is AI Changing Software Engineering Evaluation? 

AI-assisted development makes the distinction between output and capability increasingly important. 

Stack Overflow’s 2025 Developer Survey found that 84% of respondents were using or planning to use AI tools in their development process, while 51% of professional developers reported using them daily. However, 46% of developers distrusted the accuracy of AI output, compared with 33% who trusted it. 

For hiring teams, the important question is not simply whether an engineer uses AI. It is whether they have the technical foundation to evaluate what these tools produce. 

Look for the ability to: 

• Validate AI-generated code or recommendations 
• Recognize incorrect or incomplete output 
• Identify security, quality, or maintainability concerns 
• Evaluate alternatives and tradeoffs 
• Explain why a solution is appropriate 

As tools such as GitHub Copilot, Cursor, ChatGPT, and Claude become more common, polished output alone may tell us less about the judgment behind it. That makes understanding how an engineer evaluates and improves that output increasingly valuable. 

Are Your Requirements Screening Out Engineers Who Could Succeed? 

One shift I’ve noticed is that job descriptions can become more restrictive as more stakeholders contribute requirements. A legitimate business need can gradually become a long list of technologies, credentials, years of experience, and industry qualifications. 

The risk is not simply creating a smaller candidate pool. It is confusing a familiar background with a necessary capability. 

HR can help by separating qualifications into three categories: 

1. Must-haves: Capabilities genuinely required to perform the role. 
2. Transferable capabilities: Experience that can translate to the organization’s environment. 
3. Preferences: Technologies, credentials, or industry experience that would be helpful but are not essential. 

Some engineering roles genuinely require deep experience with a particular architecture, platform, security environment, or technical discipline. The point is not to remove those requirements. It is to make sure each requirement can be connected to successful performance. 

Is Every Interview Stage Providing New Evidence? 

An effective interview process should progressively improve the organization’s understanding of a candidate. If the recruiter screen, hiring manager interview, technical assessment, and panel interview all confirm essentially the same information, a longer process may not produce a better decision. 

Before adding an interview or assessment, ask: What new evidence is this stage supposed to provide? 

Interviews can explore what resumes and assessments cannot. Ask candidates to walk through challenging projects or decisions, including the alternatives they considered, constraints they faced, and what they would do differently today. 

Engineering leaders are best positioned to evaluate technical depth, architecture, code quality, and systems knowledge. HR can focus on complementary signals such as communication, adaptability, career progression, and collaboration while making sure feedback connects back to the capabilities identified for the role. 

What Should HR Evaluate During Early Candidate Interactions? 

Early interactions can provide useful evidence, but hiring teams should distinguish relevant signals from preferences that may not predict job performance. 

HR can evaluate: 

• Whether the candidate’s experience relates to the role’s actual responsibilities  
• Whether the candidate can explain their work clearly  
• Whether their questions demonstrate preparation and genuine interest  
• Whether they communicate professionally and respond reliably  
• Whether their goals align with the position and working environment  

Avoid treating presentation style, clothing, thank-you messages, or familiarity with traditional interview conventions as substitutes for capability. These factors may reflect preparation, but they do not necessarily predict engineering performance.

How Can HR Apply the Capability → Evidence → Evaluation Framework? 

The framework starts with three questions. For example, if a senior software engineer will be responsible for making architecture decisions, the required capability is technical judgment. Evidence might include a previousproject in which the candidate compared multiple approaches. The evaluation could involve asking the candidate to explain the project’s constraints, the options considered, the tradeoffs involved, and the result. 

1. Capability: What Does This Person Need to Be Able to Do?

Start with the work. Define the problems the engineer will own, the decisions they will make, the technical depth required, and the outcomes expected. 

2. Evidence: What Would Demonstrate Those Capabilities?

Identify what would help you assess them. Evidence might come from previous accomplishments, technical conversations, work samples, assessments, behavioral examples, or references. 

3. Evaluation: How Will We Assess That Evidence?

Decide which stage of the hiring process will evaluate each capability and who is best qualified to assess it. 

Before launching a search, HR and the hiring manager should be able to answer: 

1. What do we need this person to accomplish? 
2. Which capabilities will that require? 
3. Which skills must exist on day one? 
4. What evidence will demonstrate those capabilities? 
5. Where will that evidence be evaluated? 
6. What will successful performance look like after hire? 

When those answers are clear, resumes, portfolios, interviews, and assessments become tools for gathering evidence rather than competing definitions of a strong candidate. 

How Can HR Build a Better Software Engineering Hiring Process 

The strongest software engineering hiring processes I see begin with clarity about what the organization needs an engineer to accomplish. 

HR leaders can help create that clarity by distinguishing requirements from preferences, identifying the capabilities that matter, and ensuring each stage of the process contributes useful information. 

As AI becomes more integrated into software development, distinguishing polished output from underlying capability will become even more important. The tools engineers use will continue to change, but sound judgment, problem-solving, adaptability, and communication will remain valuable. 

At SOLTECH, we work with organizations as they define their technology talent needs and determine the right approach to building their teams. Whatever the hiring model, getting clear about the capabilities required for success is the best place to begin. 

FAQs 

What should HR look for when hiring a software engineer? 

HR should look for evidence of problem-solving, communication, adaptability, collaboration, career progression, and the ability to connect technical work to business needs. Engineering leaders should evaluate technical depth, architecture, code quality, and systems knowledge. 

How should employers evaluate a software engineer’s GitHub portfolio? 

Start by identifying what the portfolio is intended to demonstrate. Review the problem being solved, the candidate’s technical decisions, documentation, tradeoffs, known limitations, and evidence of iteration, not simply the number or complexity of repositories. 

How can HR evaluate technical candidates without a technical background? 

HR can evaluate communication, adaptability, career progression, collaboration, and how clearly candidates explain their decisions. Technical leaders should assess coding ability, architecture, security, systems knowledge, and other role-specific competencies. 

How is AI changing software engineering assessments? 

AI-generated output makes it more important to evaluate the candidate’s reasoning. Hiring teams should assess whether candidates can validate generated code, identify errors and security risks, explain tradeoffs, and determine whether a solution is appropriate. 

---

Linda Wiesen

Director of Client Success

Linda Wiesen is the Director of Client Success at SOLTECH and has more than nine years of experience delivering successful client outcomes, leading complex technology initiatives, and building strong client partnerships. Since joining SOLTECH in 2017, Linda has held leadership roles in project delivery and client success, helping organizations achieve their business goals through strategic technology solutions. She holds an MBA and a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from Robert Morris University.

As Director of Client Success, Linda leads SOLTECH’s Talent Acquisition and Account Management teams while continuing to foster strong client relationships. She works closely with clients and candidates to identify, evaluate, and place highly skilled technology professionals for both client engagements and internal opportunities. Linda is passionate about creating positive experiences for candidates and clients alike while helping organizations build high-performing teams.

Drawing on her experience leading client success initiatives and working closely with technology professionals, Linda shares insights on tech hiring trends, career development, interview preparation, candidate best practices, and what it takes to succeed in today’s competitive technology job market.