Hiring great people isn’t just about checking technical boxes. In fact, research suggests 85% of job success comes from well-developed soft skills, versus only 15% from technical knowledge. Yet many hiring processes still lean too heavily on technical qualifications. We’ve seen first-hand that a smarter approach to interviews, one that prioritises soft skills, fairness, and practical assessments, leads to better long-term hires.
In this guide, we share how hiring teams in engineering, manufacturing, and tech can improve their interview and assessment practices, whether hiring permanent staff or independent contractors (including outside IR35). Our focus is on keeping the process effective, inclusive, and grounded in real-world results.
Looking Beyond Technical Skills: Assessing Soft Skills and Cultural Fit
Technical prowess alone doesn’t guarantee success if a candidate lacks communication, adaptability, or alignment with your team’s values. So how can you assess these “soft” factors more effectively? Here are some strategies to move beyond the CV and coding tests:
- Behavioural Interviews: Instead of trivia or hypothetical brainteasers, ask candidates to recount real experiences that highlight teamwork, problem-solving, or resilience. For example, “Tell me about a time you managed a challenging project with limited resources.” Such questions, often called behavioural questions, prompt authentic stories that reveal how a person operates under pressure. Why it works: past behaviour can be a strong indicator of future behaviour. Many companies have embraced this, Starbucks switched to behavioural interviews and saw a 25% drop in staff turnover within a year, while Unilever’s use of behavioural questions cut hiring time by 50% and improved new-hire quality. These results underscore that digging into real scenarios helps uncover soft skills like leadership and adaptability that a simple Q&A might miss.
- Situational Exercises: You can also pose job-related scenarios and discuss how the candidate would handle them. These situational judgment tests (or just thoughtful follow-up questions) let you see a candidate’s decision-making in action. For a technical role, this might involve a project roadblock scenario; for a more practical engineering role, it could be a safety or quality-control situation on the shop floor. The key is to make it relevant to daily challenges of the job. How the candidate thinks through the problem, and the priorities they outline, can speak volumes about their soft skills (like problem-solving approach, communication, and ethical judgment).
- “Close-to-the-Job” Assessments: Some innovative hiring managers are taking it a step further by simulating real work conditions during the hiring process. The idea is to put candidates in a situation as close as possible to the actual job content, so they must demonstrate the soft skills you need. For example, if collaboration across teams is crucial, you might ask the candidate to role-play how they would get two departments to work together on a project. This sort of job simulation can reveal teamwork, empathy, and influence skills in a way standard questioning cannot. It also moves beyond rehearsed answers, candidates have to show how they’d respond, not just tell.
- Observe and Verify: During any interview, pay attention not just to what candidates say, but how they say it. Body language and communication style can provide clues about a person’s interpersonal skills. Are they actively listening, engaging respectfully, and able to articulate their thoughts clearly? One experienced interviewer on an online forum even noted that a red flag is when a technically brilliant candidate refuses to admit uncertainty, for instance, insisting their guess is correct instead of saying “I’m not sure”. Honesty and humility are vital soft skills, especially in engineering teams where safety or quality may rely on speaking up when you don’t have the answer. Reference checks can also help here: asking a former manager about how the candidate handled tough team situations or feedback can confirm the impressions you gathered.
- Culture Add vs. Culture Fit: “Culture fit” is often code for “people like us,” which can accidentally filter out diversity. Instead, define the values and behaviours that matter in your organisation’s culture (for example: safety-first mindset, customer-centric thinking, continuous learning), and assess candidates against those. Maybe you value a can-do attitude on the factory floor or a knack for creative brainstorming in your R&D lab, ask candidates to share examples reflecting those values. Remember to look for “culture add”: how someone’s unique perspective could enhance your team. This shifts the focus to inclusion. For instance, in a practical setting like manufacturing, a candidate from a different industry might bring a fresh approach to process improvement, that’s a culture add. By framing it this way, you avoid the trap of hiring only people who think or act the same, which can stifle innovation. Below are a few personal and professional based questions that span all industries but allow you to really get a feel for the person:
“What are your personal and professional ambitions for the next 1/2/5 years and how can we help you get there?”
This allows you to understand their ‘plan’ to see if you are aligned. If ambitions don’t align, it helps you make a decision. If they don’t know their ambitions, it’s a chance to explore their thoughts.
“Explain something that you have changed your opinion on in the last 1/2/5 years?”
This allows you to understand their values and map thought processes. It allows you to understand them on a personal level. Their experiences and maturity.
“What is something about you that is often misunderstood”?
This allows them to self-reflect, maybe they are viewed in a certain way that you can help and coach them.
But rather than rehearsed answers, these questions help you to gauge a real insight into someone’s personality. When considering someone for a permanent role this decision could be a significant investment in both your times. You could be working alongside this person for the next 2/5 or even 10 years.
Adapting to Different Roles: The balance of soft skills vs. technical assessment might vary by role type. For highly technical roles (software developers, design engineers), you still need to verify technical competence, but don’t neglect soft skills like communication and teamwork, these engineers will likely collaborate in teams, handle stakeholders, or mentor others. Discuss how they review code in a team, or how they handle disagreements over technical solutions. Meanwhile, for very hands-on practical roles you might emphasise work ethic, adaptability, and safety habits. Perhaps pose a scenario: “If a last-minute change disrupts your project plan, how would you handle it?” or “How do you maintain quality under a tight deadline?” The aim is to gauge reliability, problem-solving and attitude. Across the board, giving candidates a chance to be themselves is important. As one hiring manager shared online, if you only ask technical questions, “it doesn’t give them a chance to actually be a person”. So, mix in some open-ended prompts about working style or what they enjoy in a team environment, not as idle chit-chat, but to see if they communicate clearly and show self-awareness.
Training Hiring Managers for Fair and Consistent Interviewing
Even the best assessment techniques can falter if interviewers aren’t on the same page. One common pitfall is the unstructured interview, a free-flowing chat where each manager does their own thing. Sure, it feels casual, but it’s risky. Unstructured interviews have been shown to be inconsistent, often biased, and one of the least predictive methods of hiring success. Why? Because without a guide, interviewers might focus on superficial impressions or different criteria from one candidate to the next. Theres no uniformity or benchmarks to mark against. We’ve all heard of hires made because “we just clicked in the interview,” which is hardly a sound basis for selection and can unconsciously favour those who look, talk, or think like the interviewer.
The solution is to bring structure and training into your interviewing process:
- Structured Interview Guides: Develop a set of prepared questions tied to the essential competencies of the job. Every candidate should be asked these core questions in a similar order. This doesn’t turn interviews into robotic scripts – you can still have a conversational tone, but it ensures each candidate gets an equal opportunity to showcase their skills on the same topics. Research shows that structured interviews are far more effective predictors of performance than unstructured chats. In fact, a meta-analysis found structured interviews are nearly twice as predictive of job success as traditional unstructured ones. They also greatly reduce bias, because all candidates are measured against the same criteria. Consistency is key: for example, if teamwork is critical, every candidate might be asked, “Describe a successful team project you contributed to, what was your role?” and their answers all rated on a common scale. By treating each interview as a standardised assessment, you’re being fair and gathering comparable data.
- Interviewer Training and Scorecards: It’s not enough to hand out a questionnaire, train your hiring managers on how to conduct interviews fairly. Many may be subject-matter experts but not experienced in interviewing. Hold workshops or briefings on topics like avoiding leading questions, taking objective notes, and recognising their own biases (we all have them). Introduce simple scorecards to rate candidate answers against predefined criteria. For example, a 1-5 scale for each core skill, with descriptions of what a 5 looks like. This turns “gut feeling” into a more objective evaluation. It also forces interviewers to pay attention to evidence (what the candidate said or did) rather than personal chemistry. As SocialTalent’s inclusive hiring guide notes, using objective scoring systems helps quantify candidates’ responses and reduce subjectivity. After each interview, having interviewers independently score the candidate and then holding a debrief can surface different perspectives while keeping everyone grounded in the same criteria.
- Mitigating Unconscious Bias: Even well-intentioned managers can carry biases, maybe preferring a certain academic institution, or equating “polished” speaking with capability, which might disadvantage certain demographics such as non-native English speakers or neurodiverse candidates. Training should cover common biases (like affinity bias, halo effect, etc.) and how structured interviews help counteract them. Techniques such as blind resume reviews (hiding names or other personal info) at the screening stage and diverse interview panels can also help. A diverse panel means there’s a better chance to check each other’s biases, one interviewer might notice something another misses. The goal is to create a process where decisions are driven by evidence of skills and behaviours, not gut feelings about “fit.” In fact, be cautious even with the notion of “fit”, ensure it’s defined in terms of work values or team needs, not just “who I’d have a beer with.” Emphasise the idea of “culture add” over “culture fit” when training interviewers. This encourages them to look for what unique strength a candidate brings to the team dynamic, rather than homogeneity.
- Consistency and Calibration: To support fairness, HR or recruitment leads can facilitate a quick calibration meeting before interviews start. This is where everyone agrees on what good vs. great vs. poor answers might sound like for key questions. It ensures, for example, that Manager A isn’t scoring every answer strictly, while Manager B is more lenient. Similarly, maintain a unified interview process across the organisation: if some departments do rigorous structured panels and others do off-the-cuff chats, candidates will have very different experiences, and it can undermine your goals. Standardising best practices company-wide, while still allowing some tailoring per role, will elevate consistency. And remind managers: structured doesn’t mean stilted, you can still have a warm, human conversation, but within a fair framework. It actually often makes interviews easier for managers, because they have a clear roadmap to follow.
Ultimately, supporting your hiring managers with training and tools leads to more confident interviewers and more reliable hiring outcomes. It’s about moving from ad-hoc “gut” hiring to a skill-based, evidence-driven approach. Not only is this fairer (which is crucial for diversity), it also improves hiring effectiveness, you’re more likely to select the candidate who truly has the competencies for the job when you’ve evaluated everyone consistently and thoroughly.
Beyond Q&A: Projects, Case Studies and Skill Tests (Pros and Cons)
Traditional interviews, even when structured, sometimes only tell you so much. This is why many companies incorporate practical assessments; from take-home projects to on-the-spot case studies or trials, to see candidates in action. In engineering and tech, this might be a coding test or small scale design project; in manufacturing or operations, perhaps a simulation or a task on the shop floor. These tools can be powerful complements to interviews, but they need to be used thoughtfully. Let’s explore how to leverage them effectively:
- The Upside of Real-World Tasks: Giving candidates a job-related assignment can reveal their true capabilities in a way interviews might not. For instance, asking an engineering candidate to solve a mini design problem or simulation task can show you their approach, attention to detail, and mastery of relevant tools. Candidates often appreciate the chance to prove themselves beyond talking, a portfolio presentation or case study discussion can let their strengths shine through. These methods also test soft skills like perseverance and creativity under more realistic conditions. And for roles where deliverables matter (pretty much all roles, but especially creative and technical ones), it’s reassuring to see a sample of what the person can actually produce.
- Balancing Benefit vs. Burden: The downside is that assignments can become time-consuming and discouraging if not handled right. Remember that top candidates are likely busy (often already employed) and/or may be interviewing elsewhere. If you give out an overly lengthy project with a short deadline and no compensation, you risk alienating them. Great candidates may drop out if asked to invest hours in an unpaid assignment, it’s a common reason candidates narrow their options. Moreover, not everyone has equal free time; someone with family or other commitments might struggle to spend a whole weekend on your task, which inadvertently introduces bias in favour of those with more spare time. Another consideration: does performance on the assignment truly predict job success? Sometimes a polished assignment might indicate the candidate had extra preparation time or even outside help, not necessarily that they’ll excel day-to-day. So, use these tools as one data point, not the sole decider.
- When and How to Use Assignments: Only ask for the work you genuinely need to see. Before adding a test or project, ask yourself: could we evaluate this skill via a structured interview question or by reviewing their past work instead. For example, rather than a generic 10-hour take-home project for a software developer, you might review an existing code sample from their portfolio or have a live problem-solving session for an hour to observe their thought process. If you do decide a custom assignment is important (say, having a product manager candidate draft a brief strategy for a hypothetical product feature), keep it as brief and relevant as possible. A good rule of thumb is an exercise that takes a few hours at most. Make it mirror the actual job’s tasks, so it feels practical and not like busywork. Provide clear instructions, and crucially, be transparent up front about what the assignment involves and how you’ll use it. Candidates appreciate knowing the expected time investment and criteria. This transparency also signals respect for their time.
- Respect Candidates’ Effort: If an assignment is on the longer side, consider offering a voucher as a thank-you, especially for independent contractors. It’s not always common, but it’s a facilitative move that can set you apart and it shows you value their time. In some cases, companies host a paid trial day instead of an assignment. For example, bringing a finalist in for a paid day on the job (or a remote contract trial) to work with the team on a real problem can be hugely enlightening for both sides. Just be cautious to structure this properly (ensure it’s truly a short-term trial, not free labour). And absolutely never use candidate submissions to get free work for your company, aside from being unethical, word gets around and it will damage your employer brand.
- Adapt to Role and Employment Type: The necessity and type of assessment can differ for permanent vs. contract roles. For permanent hires, you’re making a long-term investment, so it might be worth a multi-step process (a screening test, then later a presentation or case study) to be sure of a great fit. Candidates for career roles often expect some rigor. Just balance it with a good candidate experience (for instance, integrate the assessment into a final round on the same day as interviews, so it doesn’t drag out too long). On the other hand, for project-based contractors or freelancers, agility is key, you often need someone who can start ASAP and deliver quickly. Lengthy interview processes will turn away contractors who usually juggle multiple opportunities. In many cases, a contractor’s portfolio and references will speak louder than a test. You might ask for examples of similar projects they’ve completed or do a short paid pilot project to evaluate their work. But avoid making contractor candidates jump through excessive hoops; if their profile and conversation show they likely have the skills, a swift hiring decision can be made (and if it somehow doesn’t work out, the contract by nature is temporary). In fact, one UK hiring guide notes that contractor interviews are typically just a single one-hour meeting, no multi-stage gauntlet, precisely because you’re evaluating a service provider, not a long-term employee. Keep that distinction in mind to respect the different expectations.
Discussing Projects with Independent Contractors (Outside IR35 in the UK)
When it comes to engaging independent contractors or consultants, especially those “outside IR35” in the UK or equivalent globally, the interview mindset should shift. Think of it less as a traditional job interview and more as a business discussion or project scoping meeting. Here’s how to approach it:
Focus on Outcomes and Deliverables: An independent contractor is essentially a specialist you’re bringing in to achieve specific results. So, direct your conversation to what really matters: Can they deliver what you need, on time and on budget? Are they equipped to solve the particular problem or project you have? For example, ask about past projects similar to yours: what was the goal, and what did they achieve? Request tangible evidence, maybe a brief walkthrough of a past deliverable, or reference from a client for whom they did a comparable task. Unlike a permanent hire, where you might delve into growth potential or long-term team fit, here you’re zeroing in on the immediate business need. As one expert put it, when interviewing a contractor/freelancer, the client is looking for the candidate’s capacity to provide a specific service in a given timeframe. In other words, can they tackle the defined task or problem? Keep the questions pragmatic and outcome-oriented: “Have you implemented this type of system before?”, “How would you approach our project X to meet Y goals by Z date?”, “What challenges do you anticipate in this contract and how would you handle them?”
Streamlined and Straightforward: Contractor discussions are usually much more to-the-point than employment interviews. You might cover in one hour what a permanent hire process would span across three rounds. This is because, for contractors, you’re not considering a dozen long-term fit factors like career progression or deep cultural integration, you’re primarily assessing skills, reliability, and professional compatibility. In practice, this means you skip the brainteasers and personality quizzes; instead, you discuss technical approach, availability, and terms. It’s wise to still gauge interpersonal fit with the team (after all, even a contractor will collaborate with your staff), but you’re mainly checking that they can mesh well enough to get the work done in the short term. The conversation should be mutually transparent: you outline the project scope and expectations, they outline how they’d meet them and raise any limitations. Treat it as a two-way professional discussion of how to make the project successful, rather than an audition where only you have a say. Contractors often choose their clients too, so it builds good rapport to have a respectful, businesslike tone.
Evaluate Independence and Initiative: Particularly for outside IR35 contractors in the UK, maintaining a clear client-supplier relationship is important (both legally and practically). One thing to look for is a contractor’s ability to work autonomously and take initiative. Ask questions that reveal if they can self-manage and problem-solve without heavy oversight, for instance, “Can you describe how you handle project roadblocks when working independently for a client?” or “How do you ensure you stay aligned with the client’s goals throughout the project?” A strong contractor will typically demonstrate proactive communication, the foresight to ask clarifying questions, and a consultative approach. In fact, seasoned contractors will often evaluate you, the client, during the “interview”, they might ask many questions about project requirements, success criteria, and constraints. That’s a good sign! It shows they’re already thinking about how to deliver value. (If a contractor doesn’t ask any questions and just says “yeah, I can do it” without digging deeper, that could be a red flag.) As one LinkedIn commentator noted, when hiring a contractor – a “short term asset to fix a specific problem”, the focus is narrower and more straightforward than hiring a permanent employee. You’re essentially verifying a shortlist of must-haves: the right skills, relevant experience, a proven track record, and the right attitude to slot into the project.
Practicalities and Professionalism: Ensure you cover logistics points too: confirm the contractor’s availability to meet your timeline, discuss their rate and how invoicing will work, and clarify expectations around deliverables and reporting. This is part of scoping projects with contractors that can be a bit like a negotiation. It’s wise to have procurement or HR aligned on these details beforehand (especially IR35 status determinations in the UK context). From a style perspective, because this is a business-to-business meeting rather than a classic interview, you can be candid. If you have concerns about any aspects, say, “This project has a very aggressive deadline, how would you handle that?”, lay it on the table. You don’t have to follow the same formality as an HR-led competency interview. And conversely, contractors aren’t typically judged on minor interview etiquette points. Clients often worry less about things like small talk skills or if the person is nervously fidgeting in a contractor interview, because what matters is whether they can do the job. In short, don’t fall into the trap of interviewing a contractor like you’re hiring a full-time employee. According to ContractorCalculator’s hiring guide, those clients who recognise the difference make much better hiring decisions for contract roles. Keep the process efficient and focused on verification of skills and fit-for-task. Once you’re satisfied they can deliver and you’ve addressed any of their questions, a prompt hiring decision will allow them to get to work, which is ultimately the goal.
Conclusion
Improving your interview and assessment practices is not just an HR box-ticking exercise; it has real impact on your organisation’s success. By looking beyond technical qualifications to really understand a candidate’s soft skills and fit, you’ll hire people who collaborate better, adapt faster, and stay longer. By structuring and training your interviews for fairness and consistency, you create a level playing field that attracts diverse talent and reduces the chance of costly hiring mistakes. And by using smart, role-appropriate assessments and knowing when to keep it simple, you gain deeper insight into candidates’ capabilities without driving them away.
For hiring managers and leads in engineering, manufacturing, and tech, these approaches can be game changers. Whether you’re bringing in a permanent engineer who will grow with your company or onboarding a specialist contractor for a critical project, tailoring your process to focus on what really matters will pay off in better hires and stronger teams. We encourage our clients to embrace these best practices. It can feel different at first, more structured interviews, more creative assessments, a different tone with contractors, but the results speak for themselves. You end up with hiring decisions that are well-informed and unbiased, and candidates who feel they were genuinely understood and given a fair shot. That’s a win-win that sets the foundation for success, long after the interview ends.
