Why inquisitiveness is key for engineers at our company

You're hiring the wrong engineers. The profile of your most valuable engineer has fundamentally changed, and your hiring process probably hasn't caught up. You're likely spending a fortune to hire the very people who will inadvertently build your biggest long-term liability. For years, we've optimised for raw developer effectiveness. But we must redefine 'effectiveness' now that the speed of getting from problem to solution is being commoditised by AI. The real leverage is no longer in creation, but in judgment. The 10x engineer of today isn't the fastest coder. They are: ✅ The Cost Controller (The Editor): They prevent future maintenance costs by deleting over-engineered code and provide the guardrails that stop the AI from drifting into revenue-killing complexity. ✅ The Value Creator (The Architect): They build a scalable platform that increases your valuation, providing the elegant constraints that turn raw code into protected, long-term IP. ✅ The Efficiency Driver (The Thinker): They eliminate entire cycles of wasted engineering effort by articulating a complex problem so precisely that the AI solves the right problem from the start. If your team is full of fast coders but lacks these roles, you're not accelerating. You're just building technical debt faster than ever before. Stop hiring for speed. Start hiring for judgment.

stop hiring engineers who dont understand the business feature requests: "just tell me what to build" user feedback: "thats the PMs job to figure out" metrics discussions: "i just write the code, someone else tracks success" youre not gonna build great products if you got a bunch of code monkeys on your team the engineers who think like product owners are the ones who build features users actually love the ones who question requirements instead of blindly implementing them the ones who suggest better solutions based on user behavior they actually understand the ones who care if their feature gets used or just shipped you can teach someone to implement tickets but you cant teach them to think about outcomes you can train someone on frameworks but you cant train the curiosity to understand why users behave the way they do the best engineers ive worked with obsess over user metrics as much as code quality they push back on features that dont make sense they suggest improvements based on data not assumptions they build things that solve real problems instead of checking boxes meanwhile the feature factory workers are cranking out code without ever talking to a user or looking at analytics engineering without product sense is just expensive typing choose wisely - product engineers or human compilers

I’m watching something that doesn’t add up 🤔 Some of the best engineers I know—people who’ve built systems that handled millions of users, architected platforms that created real business value, shipped products that stood the test of time—are hitting unexpected friction in the job market. These aren’t junior developers or people with concerning gaps in their experience. These are the engineers you’d want on your team. The ones who’ve been through multiple cycles, who know how to build for scale, who understand the difference between clever code and maintainable code. Yet many of them are telling me the hiring process feels different than it did even two years ago. Longer. More complex. More uncertain. I get that we’re in the middle of a paradigm shift with AI-assisted development. The way we write code, the skills we prioritize, even what we consider “senior” engineering work is all evolving. Maybe that’s a large part of what’s creating this friction. But I’m genuinely curious about what’s happening behind the scenes in hiring decisions. If you’re hiring engineering talent right now, I’d love to understand your thought process. What criteria are you prioritizing? How are you thinking about traditional experience versus adaptability to new tools? Are you seeing something in the market that’s shifting your approach? I’m trying to understand the real dynamics at play beyond what we read in headlines about tech hiring. Because from where I sit, there is a disconnect between the quality of talent that’s available and how smoothly that talent is finding homes. What am I missing?

Seniority in Software Engineering: It’s more than just years of experience Have you ever met someone with 7 years of experience who still feels more junior than an engineer with only 2 years? If yes, then you already know: seniority ≠ time served. We often hear these rough labels: • Junior → < 2 years • Mid-level → 2–5 years • Senior → 5+ years But the truth is, seniority is multi-dimensional. Years of experience matter, but they don’t tell the whole story. Some key dimensions are: 1️⃣ Technical Mastery → depth in languages, frameworks, system design, performance, and security. 2️⃣ Autonomy & Problem Solving → ability to move independently and find solutions without constant hand-holding. 3️⃣ Ownership → taking end-to-end responsibility for stability, quality, and outcomes. 4️⃣ Collaboration & Leadership → mentoring, giving constructive feedback, and contributing to team decisions. 5️⃣ Business Impact → connecting technical decisions to business goals. From my perspective, ownership is the single most important dimension. The moment an engineer can take end-to-end ownership of larger, critical work, that’s when they cross into “senior” territory. Example: I once saw an engineer with only 3 years of experience design and implement a mission-critical service end-to-end, while teammates with more years under their belt still waited for guidance. That’s ownership in action. And what about formal education? Sure, it helps—especially with fundamentals—but it’s not a prerequisite. With or without it, growth depends on practice and exposure. So here’s my question to you: What do you think is the most important factor in being a true “Senior” software engineer? ⸻ #SoftwareEngineering #CareerGrowth #Leadership #EngineeringCulture #SoftwareDevelopment #TechLeadership #Developers #Engineering

you are only 10 year experience junior engineer just be real here.. the uncomfortable truth: Time served ≠ level. I’ve met engineers with 2 years who design scalable systems better than those with 10. So when recruiters see “5 or 10 years experience,” it doesn’t always mean mid or senior. The real test is: • Can your code survive another engineer reading it? • Does the system still run when one piece breaks? • Do you think about trade-offs, not just quick fixes? After 5 years, I’ll be honest I still catch myself with junior habits. But here’s what I believe separates people who grow: - Owning mistakes instead of hiding them. - Caring about architecture, not just features. - Asking why before coding what. - Making the team faster, not just yourself. Titles and years don’t matter as much as mindset + responsibility + impact. I’m actively growing from “gets things done” → “builds things that last.” And I’d love to bring that growth mindset into a team that values clean systems, collaboration, and long-term impact. Recruiters & hiring managers when you evaluate a candidate with 5 years, what signals do you look for to know if they’re truly mid/senior? #SoftwareEngineering #Technology #Engineering #Developers #Programming #CareerGrowth #TechCareers #Recruitment #OpenToWork

We're interviewing senior engineers for a world that no longer exists. For years, we’ve hired for memorized knowledge, like "5 years with Kubernetes." That model is now outdated because AI can generate technical information on demand. The new differentiator is not what an engineer knows, but the quality of their engineering process. Seniority is now defined by an engineer's ability to orchestrate the development process through foundational practices and differentiating cognitive skills. 1. Foundational Practices: These are the timeless frameworks for any successful project. Fluency is non-negotiable.  * Translating business goals into technical requirements.  * Mastering the full Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC).  * Creating and critiquing design documents and diagrams. 2. Differentiating Skills: These are the active skills that drive value when information is a commodity.  * Asking high-leverage, strategic questions.  * Synthesizing disparate concepts into a cohesive solution.  * Guaranteeing an artifact's correctness by validating its logic and behavior against its design. This is the fundamental requirement, whether it's achieved by reading code directly or by auditing an AI-generated logical map. Our interviews are broken because we still test for the commodity (perishable knowledge) instead of the durable skill (process and validation). Let's fix it. Instead of asking: "Do you have 5 years of experience with technology X?" We should be asking: "Here is a business goal. Talk me through your process for creating and validating a technical solution." This tests everything that matters. It’s time to stop hiring encyclopedias and start hiring architects.

Some of the best engineers I’ve worked with don’t look “impressive” from the outside. No big GitHub stars. No polished blogs. Just a couple of todo apps sitting there. But I’ve seen them debug kernel logs at 2 AM. Think through system edge cases while eating or commuting. They don’t switch their brain off. Solving problems is just who they are. And that’s exactly why they thrive in messy startup setups, limited time, full ownership, zero excuses. The sad part? A lot of hiring still filters talent based on surface signals like open-source activity, LinkedIn buzzwords. And that means these engineers often get overlooked. If you really want problem solvers, you need to test for it: real debugging, deep dives, performance breakdowns. Not just profile scanning. Because judging an engineer by their GitHub stars is like judging a musician by their Instagram followers. Visibility ≠ ability.

How does LinkedIn build AI Agents that think, plan, act and collaborate with users? How have we evolved since we launched our first agent - Hiring Assistant? How have we embraced recent trends? Find answers to this and more in our engineering blog post by Karthik Ramgopal, which I'm proud to have co-authored. https://lnkd.in/gGe8PKTv #aiagents #agents #genai

The history of our creator Two years ago, I moved to the US with one belief: strong skills = quick job offer. Reality check: Endless applications. Radio silence. Irrelevant matches. Interviews that felt like lottery tickets. Here's what I learned: I'm a project manager, not a performer. And there are thousands like me. But here's the real question nobody's asking: Should a System Architect be a marketing expert? Should a DevOps Engineer master self-promotion? Should a Developer become a salesperson? We're building solutions in silos while the hiring system rewards showmanship over substance. The current system says "yes, everyone must sell themselves." But what if we're solving the wrong problem? What if instead of teaching engineers to market themselves, we built a system that actually recognizes their value? Stay tuned. We're not just talking about change – we're building it. Because the best talent shouldn't need the loudest voice. What's your take? Have you faced this disconnect between skills and visibility? #TechHiring #EngineeringTalent #FutureOfWork #TechRecruiting #StartupLife #HiringInnovation #TechCareers #DisruptHR #SiliconValley #ProductManagement #DevOps #SoftwareEngineering #CareerDevelopment #TechLeadership #WorkplaceCulture

The tech industry presents a hidden truth about hiring: the struggle of great engineers to stand out. Two years ago, I arrived in the US believing that strong skills equated to rapid job offers. The reality hit hard: countless applications, deafening silence, and mismatched interviews resembling a game of chance. My revelation? I excel as a project manager, not a showman. This dilemma isn't mine alone – it resonates with thousands like me. Yet, a critical question remains unasked: Should a System Architect double as a marketing guru? 😵💫 Must a DevOps Engineer excel at self-promotion? 🤨 Is it fair to expect Developers to morph into sales wizards? 🤔 As we craft solutions in isolation, the hiring landscape favors flair over substance. The status quo dictates that everyone must sell themselves. But what if this premise is flawed? What if, instead of coaching engineers on self-promotion, we designed a system that truly appreciates their expertise? Stay engaged. We're not merely discussing change – we're actively shaping it. After all, genuine talent shouldn't necessitate the loudest voice. Now, I turn to you: Have you encountered this disconnect between skill and visibility? Share your insights. #TechHiring #EngineeringTalent #FutureOfWork #TechRecruiting #StartupLife #HiringInnovation #TechCareers #DisruptHR #SiliconValley #ProductManagement #DevOps #SoftwareEngineering #CareerDevelopment #TechLeadership #WorkplaceCulture