除了符合职位描述，你如何评估工程师？
1 分•作者: D___R___•7 天前
我很好奇大家在实践中是如何处理这个问题的。<p>从纸面上看，招聘通常始于明确的标准：技术栈匹配、经验年限、过往职位。但我注意到，很多候选人都能很好地符合职位描述——有时甚至会引导谈话内容以适应描述，但这并非真正的信号。<p>久而久之，我开始看到两个层面：
1. 形式上的匹配——经验、技能、职位契合度（这仍然重要，且必须具备）
2. 人际上的匹配——当事情变得困难时，沟通的感觉如何<p>让我惊讶的是，第二部分在后期往往起着决定性的作用。<p>当优先级发生变化、截止日期延误、范围变更，或者有人需要做超出职位描述范围的工作时——技术上的差距通常是可以解决的。但糟糕的沟通或缺乏信任会带来非常高的成本。<p>所以我想知道：
- 在不完全依赖直觉的情况下，您个人是如何评估这方面的人际关系的？
- 您是否见过因为沟通问题而导致技术能力很强的候选人失败的案例？
- 在面试过程中，您会寻找哪些具体的信号？<p>我更感兴趣的是实用的方法，而不是理论。
查看原文
I’m curious how others approach this in practice.<p>On paper, hiring often starts with clear criteria: stack match, years of experience, prior roles. But I’ve noticed that many candidates can align well with a job description - sometimes even shape the conversation to fit it without that being the real signal.<p>Over time, I started to see two layers:
1. Formal fit — experience, skills, role alignment (this still matters and must be there)
2. Human fit — how communication feels when things get hard<p>What surprised me is how often the second part becomes decisive later.<p>When priorities shift, deadlines slip, scope changes, or someone needs to work outside what was written in the role - technical gaps can usually be solved. But poor communication or lack of trust becomes very expensive.<p>So I’m wondering:
- How do you personally evaluate this human side without relying on gut feeling alone?
- Have you seen cases where strong technical fit failed because of communication?
- Do you have concrete signals you look for during interviews?<p>Interested in practical approaches, not theory.