In the fast-paced world of engineering, technical skills often take center stage in hiring decisions. However, there's a trait that consistently predicts long-term success but can be challenging to evaluate: humility. In engineering contexts, humility refers to a balanced self-awareness that allows professionals to accurately assess their abilities, acknowledge knowledge gaps, and remain open to learning from others. Unlike arrogance or insecurity, humility enables engineers to maintain confidence in their strengths while recognizing areas for growth and valuing diverse perspectives.

Humility is particularly vital in engineering roles for several reasons. First, it drives continuous learning and improvement in a field where technologies evolve rapidly. Engineers with humility readily seek feedback, adapt to new approaches, and consistently expand their skill sets. Second, it fosters psychological safety in technical teams, creating environments where members feel comfortable sharing ideas, admitting mistakes, and collaborating effectively. Finally, humble engineers tend to make more objective technical decisions, evaluating options based on merit rather than ego or personal preference.

When assessing candidates, thoughtful behavioral questions can reveal authentic humility in action. These questions should explore how candidates have handled technical challenges, responded to feedback, navigated team dynamics, and learned from failures. By focusing on specific past situations rather than hypothetical scenarios, you can gain valuable insights into a candidate's genuine approach to humility in professional settings, which Yardstick's research shows is a stronger predictor of future behavior than hypothetical responses.

Interview Questions

Tell me about a time when you realized you had made a significant technical error in your work. How did you handle it?

Areas to Cover:

• Details of the technical error and its potential impact
• How the candidate discovered the error (self-discovery vs. pointed out by others)
• The actions taken to address the mistake
• How they communicated the error to stakeholders and team members
• Steps taken to prevent similar mistakes in the future
• What they learned from the experience

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you feel when you first realized the mistake?
• What was the most challenging part of addressing this error?
• How did your team or manager respond to how you handled the situation?
• How has this experience changed your approach to similar work?

Describe a situation where you received feedback that contradicted your initial approach to a technical problem. How did you respond?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the technical problem and the candidate's initial approach
• The source and specifics of the contradicting feedback
• How the candidate evaluated the feedback
• The candidate's emotional and practical response
• Whether and how they adjusted their approach
• The outcome of the situation

Follow-Up Questions:

• What made this feedback particularly challenging to receive?
• How did you evaluate whether the feedback was valid?
• If you chose to change your approach, what convinced you to do so?
• How has this experience affected how you give and receive feedback now?

Tell me about a complex engineering problem where you needed to seek help from others. How did you approach this situation?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature and complexity of the engineering problem
• How the candidate recognized their knowledge limitations
• Their process for identifying appropriate resources or people for help
• How they approached asking for assistance
• What they learned from the experience
• How they applied this knowledge afterward

Follow-Up Questions:

• At what point did you decide you needed to ask for help?
• How did you determine who to approach for assistance?
• What specifically did you learn that you've applied to subsequent work?
• How did this experience change your approach to problem-solving?

Describe a time when a more junior team member or peer pointed out a flaw in your reasoning or code that you hadn't noticed.

Areas to Cover:

• The specific situation and the nature of the flaw
• The candidate's immediate reaction
• How they responded to the person who identified the issue
• Actions taken to address the flaw
• Impact on their relationship with that team member
• What they learned from this experience

Follow-Up Questions:

• What was your initial reaction when they pointed out the flaw?
• How did you ensure the person felt valued for their contribution?
• Has this affected how you interact with junior team members? If so, how?
• What steps have you taken to encourage this kind of feedback in the future?

Tell me about a situation where your team implemented an approach different from what you initially recommended. How did you handle it?

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the decision and the candidate's original recommendation
• The alternative approach that was chosen
• How the candidate responded to the team's decision
• The candidate's behavior during implementation
• The outcome of the situation
• Lessons learned from the experience

Follow-Up Questions:

• What was your thought process when you realized the team was going in a different direction?
• How did you contribute to the implementation of the chosen approach?
• What did you learn about your original recommendation through this process?
• How has this experience influenced how you present recommendations now?

Describe a time when you were working with technology or in a domain where you had limited experience. How did you approach that situation?

Areas to Cover:

• The specific technology or domain and the candidate's experience level
• How the candidate assessed their knowledge gaps
• Strategies they used to acquire necessary knowledge
• How they balanced learning with delivery requirements
• How they leveraged team resources or expertise
• The outcome and what they learned

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you communicate your experience level to your team or stakeholders?
• What was most challenging about working with limited domain knowledge?
• What specific strategies did you find most effective for rapid learning?
• How has this experience influenced how you approach new technologies now?

Tell me about a time when you had to change your mind about a technical decision based on new information or perspectives from others.

Areas to Cover:

• The original technical decision and the candidate's rationale
• The new information or perspectives that emerged
• How the candidate processed this new input
• The decision-making process for changing course
• How they communicated the change to stakeholders
• The outcome of the revised approach

Follow-Up Questions:

• What aspects of the new information were most compelling to you?
• How did you balance the costs of changing direction against potential benefits?
• How did you communicate your change in thinking to the team?
• What did this experience teach you about decision-making in technical contexts?

Describe a situation where you were recognized for an achievement that was actually a team effort. How did you handle it?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the achievement and recognition
• The contributions of various team members
• How the candidate responded in the moment
• Actions taken to acknowledge team contributions
• Impact on team dynamics and relationships
• Lessons learned about recognition and credit

Follow-Up Questions:

• What was your immediate reaction when you received individual recognition?
• What specific steps did you take to ensure team members' contributions were recognized?
• How did your response affect your relationships with team members?
• How has this experience influenced how you handle recognition in subsequent situations?

Tell me about a time when you advocated for a technical approach that turned out to be incorrect or suboptimal. What happened?

Areas to Cover:

• The technical approach and the context of the decision
• Why the candidate initially advocated for this approach
• How and when they realized it was incorrect or suboptimal
• Their actions once they recognized the issues
• How they communicated with stakeholders about the situation
• What they learned from this experience

Follow-Up Questions:

• What assumptions led you to advocate for that approach?
• How did you come to realize it wasn't the best solution?
• What was the most challenging aspect of acknowledging the approach wasn't working?
• How has this experience changed your approach to technical advocacy?

Describe your approach to mentoring or training junior engineers. Can you give a specific example that illustrates your methods?

Areas to Cover:

• The candidate's mentoring philosophy and approach
• A specific mentoring situation they've experienced
• How they balanced guiding versus empowering the junior engineer
• How they created psychological safety for questions and mistakes
• Methods for providing feedback and encouragement
• Evidence of the mentee's growth or development

Follow-Up Questions:

• How do you adjust your approach for different learning styles or experience levels?
• Can you share a time when your mentee taught you something new?
• How do you ensure you're not just creating copies of yourself?
• What's the most rewarding aspect of mentoring junior engineers for you?

Tell me about a time when you worked with someone who had significantly more expertise than you in a particular area. How did you approach that relationship?

Areas to Cover:

• The context of the working relationship
• The expert's domain and level of expertise
• How the candidate approached learning from this person
• Specific strategies for maximizing the learning opportunity
• Challenges in the relationship and how they were navigated
• Impact on the candidate's professional development

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you establish a productive working relationship with this expert?
• What specific approaches helped you learn the most from them?
• Were there any challenges in the relationship? How did you address them?
• How did this experience influence how you interact with subject matter experts now?

Describe a scenario where you realized that a significant engineering assumption you'd been working under was incorrect. What did you do?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the assumption and why it was made initially
• How the candidate discovered it was incorrect
• The potential impact of continuing with the incorrect assumption
• Actions taken to address the situation
• Communication with stakeholders about the issue
• Lessons learned about assumptions and validation

Follow-Up Questions:

• What led you to question this assumption?
• How did you confirm that the assumption was actually incorrect?
• How did you communicate this discovery to your team or stakeholders?
• What processes have you put in place to validate assumptions in your current work?

Tell me about a particularly challenging piece of feedback you received about your technical work or approach. How did you handle it?

Areas to Cover:

• The specific feedback and its context
• The candidate's initial reaction
• How they evaluated the validity of the feedback
• Actions taken in response to the feedback
• Long-term impact on their work or approach
• What they learned from the experience

Follow-Up Questions:

• What made this feedback particularly challenging to receive?
• How did you work through your initial reaction to the feedback?
• What actions did you take as a result of this feedback?
• How has this experience changed how you give feedback to others?

Describe a time when you had to admit to your team or stakeholders that you didn't have the answer to an important technical question.

Areas to Cover:

• The context and the specific technical question
• Why the candidate didn't have the answer
• How they communicated this to the team or stakeholders
• Steps taken to find the answer or solution
• The outcome of the situation
• Impact on their credibility and relationships

Follow-Up Questions:

• What was going through your mind as you realized you needed to admit not knowing?
• How did you frame this admission to maintain team confidence?
• What specific steps did you take to find the answer after this admission?
• How has this experience influenced how you handle similar situations now?

Tell me about a time when you discovered a much simpler solution to a complex problem you had been working on. What happened?

Areas to Cover:

• The complex problem and the initial approach
• How the simpler solution was discovered
• The candidate's reaction to finding a simpler way
• Whether and how they pivoted to the simpler approach
• How they communicated this to stakeholders
• Lessons learned about problem-solving approaches

Follow-Up Questions:

• What factors had led you to initially pursue the more complex approach?
• What triggered the realization that a simpler solution existed?
• How did you feel about the time spent on the more complex approach?
• How has this experience influenced your approach to problem-solving now?

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is humility so important specifically in engineering roles?

Humility is crucial in engineering because the field is constantly evolving with new technologies, methodologies, and best practices. Engineers who lack humility often become resistant to change, miss learning opportunities, and have difficulty collaborating on complex problems that require diverse perspectives. Research shows that humble engineers typically produce more maintainable code, create more inclusive team environments, and make better technical decisions by considering all available evidence rather than defending their initial positions.

How can I differentiate between genuine humility and candidates who are just good at saying the right things in interviews?

Look for consistency and specific details in their responses. Genuinely humble candidates will provide nuanced examples with specific technical details, emotions they experienced, and concrete actions they took. They'll naturally mention others' contributions without prompting and will speak candidly about mistakes or limitations. Use follow-up questions to probe deeper and look for authenticity in how they describe both successes and failures. As outlined in our guide to structured interviewing, consistent questioning across candidates helps reveal authentic differences.

Can too much humility be a negative trait for engineers?

Yes, there's a balance to strike. Excessive humility that manifests as significant self-doubt, inability to advocate for good ideas, or reluctance to lead when appropriate can be problematic. The ideal candidate demonstrates confident humility—they have conviction in their knowledge and abilities while maintaining awareness of their limitations and openness to other perspectives. Listen for how candidates balance assertiveness with receptiveness in their examples.

How should I adapt these questions for different seniority levels?

For junior candidates, focus more on learning orientation, receptiveness to feedback, and willingness to ask questions. For mid-level engineers, emphasize questions about balancing confidence with openness and contributing to team success. For senior candidates and leaders, prioritize questions about mentoring others, creating humble team cultures, and handling situations where they needed to defer to others' expertise despite their leadership position.

Should I explicitly tell candidates I'm assessing humility?

It's generally better not to explicitly state which trait you're assessing, as this can lead to performative answers. Instead, explain that you're interested in learning about their approach to teamwork, problem-solving, and continuous learning. The interview process design should naturally reveal authentic traits without telegraphing what you're specifically measuring.

Interested in a full interview guide with Assessing Humility in Engineering Roles as a key trait? Sign up for Yardstick and build it for free.