Define the role
Share the requisition, the level and the skills that matter. We turn it into a screening matrix rather than reading resumes impressionistically.
Interview as a service
Your technical interview team, on demand.
Scale engineering interviews with experienced technical interviewers, structured evaluation and consistent candidate feedback — without adding more burden to your engineering team.
For engineering and talent teams running technical hiring at volume.
Interview lifecycle
IllustrativeHiring team
Requisition opened
Senior Backend Engineer
Interview request
Skills + criteria attached
System Design · 75 min
Matched interviewer
Timezone aligned
15 yrs · payments platforms
Structured interview
Consistent framework
Recorded · rubric applied
Scorecard
Recommendation + confidence
Evidence per criterion
Hiring decision
Within agreed turnaround
Delivered to your ATS
Built for teams that take technical hiring seriously.
- 16 interview types
- Each with its own rubric, not one template renamed.
- 5-point anchored scale
- Every level describes what it looks like, so scores compare.
- Evidence required, not optional
- A rating will not submit without what was actually observed.
- Zero AI scoring
- Every word is written by the interviewer who ran the session.
The problem
Engineering teams shouldn't have to choose between building products and conducting interviews.
Interview load is a function of hiring volume, but interview capacity is a function of engineering headcount. The two move against each other.
- 01
Hiring plan grows
More open roles enter the pipeline.
- 02
Interview volume rises
Each role multiplies into several rounds per candidate.
- 03
Engineers absorb it
Interviewing comes out of the same hours as delivery.
- 04
Consistency drifts
Different interviewers apply the bar differently.
- 05
Scheduling stalls
Calendars become the constraint, not candidate supply.
- 06
Hiring slows
The roles you opened take longer to close.
The approach
A flexible interview team that scales with your hiring.
We provide experienced interviewers when you need them, working to a framework you have agreed in advance.
Step 1
Your demand
Roles, volume and the skills that need evaluating.
Step 2
Our interviewer network
Practising engineers, matched to the requirement.
Step 3
Interview capacity
Added when you need it, without permanent headcount.
Step 4
Structured feedback
The same rubric applied to every candidate.
Step 5
Your hiring decision
Evidence your team can act on directly.
Why teams use it
What changes when interviewing stops being a side task.
Scale capacity
Add interview bandwidth when hiring demand increases, and reduce it when it doesn't. Capacity stops being tied to headcount.
Reduce engineering burden
Engineers spend more time building. The interview hour, the write-up and the context switch all come off their calendar.
Consistent evaluation
Every candidate is assessed against the same written rubric, with evidence recorded for each score.
Better candidate experience
Interviews start on time, follow a clear structure and are conducted by someone who does this regularly.
How it works
Four steps from open role to hiring signal.
Tell us what to evaluate
Choose interview types and the competencies each one should test. Your criteria, applied consistently.
We match an interviewer
An interviewer with relevant depth, in a workable timezone, calibrated against your bar.
Receive structured feedback
A scored rubric with evidence, a written summary and a clear recommendation — delivered on an agreed turnaround.
Coverage
Interview types we support.
Each type carries its own rubric and competency set. Criteria can be adjusted per role.
Coding
60mApplied programming against a realistic problem, with emphasis on working code and reasoning.
- Problem solving
- Code quality
- Testing instinct
Algorithms
60mComplexity reasoning and algorithmic decomposition on problems with more than one viable approach.
- Complexity analysis
- Decomposition
Data Structures
60mSelection and trade-offs of core data structures under stated constraints.
- Trade-off reasoning
- Fundamentals
System Design
75mRequirements clarification, data modelling, failure modes and explicit trade-offs at scale.
- Architecture
- Scale
- Failure modes
Backend
60mService design, data access patterns, API contracts and operational concerns.
- API design
- Data modelling
Frontend
60mComponent architecture, state management, accessibility and rendering performance.
- Component design
- Accessibility
Mobile
60mPlatform fundamentals, lifecycle handling, offline behaviour and release considerations.
- Platform depth
- Lifecycle
Cloud
60mManaged service selection, networking, cost awareness and operational trade-offs.
- Service selection
- Cost awareness
Infrastructure
60mCI/CD, observability, incident response and infrastructure-as-code practice.
- Observability
- Incident handling
Quality system
Great interviews don't happen by accident.
Consistency is a process, not a promise. This is the loop that produces it.
- 1
Select
Senior engineers and engineering leaders across sectors, including enterprise backgrounds, screened by the same standard we sell.
- 2
Train
Onboarding on the rubric, the evidence requirement and candidate conduct.
- 3
Calibrate
Shared scoring exercises until interviewers agree on the same bar.
- 4
Interview
A structured, adaptive session against a written framework — one interviewer, one candidate, no recording.
- 5
Review
Sampled scorecards re-scored blind, with variance tracked per interviewer.
- 6
Improve
Outcome data feeds back into anchors, questions and interviewer coaching.
The loop closes only when clients share downstream outcomes. That reporting is part of the engagement.
The platform
Everything you need to manage technical interviews.
Request interviews, track status, and read every scorecard in one place.
Product preview
Interviews this month
17
Awaiting feedback
2
Active roles
3
Candidates in process
24
Upcoming and recent
4 of 24| Candidate | Role | Type | When | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priya R. | Senior Backend Engineer | System Design | 3 Sep, 08:00 PT | Scheduled |
| Daniel O. | Senior Backend Engineer | Coding | 30 Aug, 06:00 PT | Feedback pending |
| Mei T. | Frontend Engineer | Frontend | 27 Aug, 09:00 CT | Feedback submitted |
| Owen B. | Frontend Engineer | Coding | Awaiting match | Matching |
The deliverable
A decision you can act on, not a transcript to interpret.
Every interview returns scores against a written rubric, the evidence behind each one, and an explicit recommendation with a confidence level.
Senior Backend Engineer · System Design
Candidate scorecard
HireHigh confidence
Problem solving
Decomposed an ambiguous brief before writing any code.
Technical depth
Accurate on consistency trade-offs without prompting.
System design
Sound data model; capacity estimates needed prompting.
Communication
Narrated reasoning continuously; asked clarifying questions early.
Trade-off reasoning
Named three options and justified the one chosen.
Summary
Clears the bar for the level. Design reasoning is sound but capacity estimation needed prompting — worth a targeted probe in the final round.
Illustrative example.
For engineering leaders
Give your engineers their time back.
Not by removing them from hiring, but by removing the parts that don't need their judgement.
An engineer’s week today
- Building
- Interviewing
- Scheduling
- Writing feedback
- Debriefs
With interview capacity in place
- Building
- Final-round decisions
The interview hour is only part of it — preparation, the write-up and the context switch back into delivery all come off the calendar too.
Two ways to start.
Hiring teams can walk through their requirements with us. Experienced engineers can join the interviewer network.