Tech Interview Scoring Guides by Employer Archetype

The defining feature of a technical loop is not difficulty — it is what the hiring panel actually scores. Select an employer tier below to view its scoring rubrics, common traps, and recommended prep plans.

FAANG • MAANG • Big Tech

Big Tech and product companies

Large product companies running a standardised, centrally calibrated loop: an algorithmic screen, one or two design rounds scaled to level, and a behavioural round scored against published principles.

Key Scoring Traps:

Optimising the algorithm and never stating the complexity or the constraint that made it necessary
Designing for a scale nobody asked about, which reads as pattern-matching rather than judgement

View scoring guide & rubrics Build plan →

GCC • global capability centre • global capability center

GCC and captive centres

The offshore engineering arm of a global bank, insurer, retailer, telco, or product company, hiring to own a product area rather than to staff a project.

Key Scoring Traps:

Treating the domain round as small talk and answering it with generic engineering
Claiming a framework on the CV and failing on its runtime behaviour, which is the fastest no in this loop

View scoring guide & rubrics Build plan →

consulting • system integrator • SI

IT services and consulting

Firms that sell delivery capacity and advisory work to clients, where the interview is partly technical assessment and partly a rehearsal of how you will sound in front of the client paying for you.

Key Scoring Traps:

Answering an ambiguous scenario with a technical solution before establishing who the stakeholder is and what they are optimising for
Treating process questions as bureaucracy, when the panel reads that as someone who will surprise a client with a slipped date

View scoring guide & rubrics Build plan →

startup • scale-up • seed

Startups and scale-ups

Small product teams hiring for end-to-end ownership, where the loop is short, idiosyncratic, and usually anchored on a take-home or a paired session in the actual codebase.

Key Scoring Traps:

Over-engineering the take-home, which reads as someone who cannot judge stage-appropriate scope
Deferring every product question to a product manager who does not exist yet

View scoring guide & rubrics Build plan →