Practical Work Samples for Hiring a Director of Engineering

The Director of Engineering role is pivotal to an organization's technological success, serving as the bridge between business objectives and technical execution. This leadership position requires a unique blend of technical expertise, strategic vision, people management skills, and cross-functional collaboration abilities. Traditional interviews often fail to reveal how candidates will actually perform in these complex areas, making practical work samples essential for effective evaluation.

Work samples provide a window into how candidates approach real-world challenges they'll face in the role. For a Director of Engineering, these exercises should assess their ability to develop technical strategy, lead engineering teams through challenges, make critical architectural decisions, and collaborate with stakeholders across the organization. By observing candidates in action, hiring teams can make more informed decisions based on demonstrated capabilities rather than self-reported accomplishments.

The stakes for hiring a Director of Engineering are exceptionally high. A poor hire can lead to misaligned technical strategy, team dysfunction, project failures, and significant opportunity costs. Conversely, the right hire can transform an engineering organization, accelerate product development, and drive innovation that creates competitive advantage. Work samples help mitigate hiring risk by providing objective data points that complement interview assessments.

The following work samples are designed to evaluate the essential competencies required for Director of Engineering success: strategic thinking, people leadership, technical expertise, stakeholder management, and problem-solving. Each exercise simulates a realistic scenario the candidate would encounter in the role, allowing hiring teams to assess how candidates think, communicate, and execute under conditions similar to the actual job.

By incorporating these exercises into your hiring process, you'll gain deeper insights into each candidate's capabilities and fit for your specific engineering organization. This approach not only improves selection accuracy but also gives candidates a clearer understanding of the role's expectations and challenges, leading to better alignment between candidate expectations and job realities.

Activity #1: Engineering Strategy Development

This exercise evaluates a candidate's ability to develop a comprehensive engineering strategy that aligns with business objectives—a fundamental responsibility for any Director of Engineering. It assesses strategic thinking, technical vision, resource planning, and the ability to communicate complex technical concepts to diverse stakeholders.

Directions for the Company:

• Provide the candidate with a brief (1-2 pages) describing your company's product roadmap for the next 12-18 months, including key business objectives, target markets, and planned features.
• Include current engineering team structure, technology stack, and any known technical challenges or limitations.
• Give the candidate 48 hours to prepare a 20-minute presentation followed by 25 minutes of Q&A.
• Assemble a panel including the hiring manager, CTO or VP of Engineering, a product leader, and potentially another engineering leader.
• Provide clear evaluation criteria to the panel, focusing on strategic thinking, alignment with business goals, technical feasibility, and communication clarity.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the provided materials and develop an engineering strategy that will support the company's product roadmap.
• Prepare a 20-minute presentation that covers:
• Key strategic initiatives for the engineering organization
• Proposed team structure and growth plan
• Technology decisions and architecture evolution
• Development processes and quality assurance approach
• Timeline with major milestones
• Potential risks and mitigation strategies
• Be prepared to answer questions about your rationale, alternatives considered, and implementation details.
• Focus on demonstrating how your strategy aligns with and enables business objectives.

Feedback Mechanism:

• After the presentation and Q&A, the panel should provide two specific pieces of feedback: one aspect of the strategy that was particularly strong, and one area that could be improved.
• Give the candidate 10 minutes to respond to the improvement feedback, explaining how they would adjust their approach based on this input.
• Observe how receptive the candidate is to feedback and their ability to adapt their thinking in real-time.

Activity #2: Engineering Team Challenge Simulation

This exercise assesses a candidate's leadership approach, people management skills, and ability to navigate complex team dynamics. It reveals how they would handle the interpersonal challenges that are common in engineering leadership roles and their approach to developing team members.

Directions for the Company:

• Create a detailed scenario describing a challenging team situation, such as:
• A high-performing engineer who creates friction with teammates
• A team that consistently misses deadlines despite working long hours
• Conflict between two technical leads about an architectural decision
• A team struggling with technical debt while under pressure to deliver new features
• Provide context about team composition, history, and relevant personalities.
• Schedule a 45-minute role-play session with an experienced engineering leader playing the role of a team member.
• Brief the role-player thoroughly on their character and how to respond to different approaches.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the scenario and prepare for a one-on-one conversation with the team member.
• During the 30-minute role-play, demonstrate your approach to:
• Understanding the root causes of the issue
• Providing constructive feedback
• Developing an action plan to address the challenge
• Setting clear expectations
• Supporting the team member's growth
• After the role-play, spend 15 minutes explaining to the observers your thought process, what you were trying to accomplish, and what follow-up actions you would take.

Feedback Mechanism:

• The observer should provide feedback on one aspect of the conversation that was particularly effective and one area where a different approach might have been more successful.
• Ask the candidate to explain how they would adjust their approach based on this feedback and what they might do differently in a similar future situation.
• The role-player should also share their perspective on how the conversation felt from the team member's point of view.

Activity #3: Technical Architecture Review

This exercise evaluates a candidate's technical expertise, critical thinking, and ability to assess and improve complex systems. It reveals their technical depth, architectural thinking, and approach to balancing technical excellence with practical constraints.

Directions for the Company:

• Prepare documentation of an actual technical system from your organization (with sensitive details removed or modified).
• Include architecture diagrams, key components, technology choices, and known pain points.
• If possible, include metrics on performance, reliability, and scalability.
• Schedule a 60-minute session with 2-3 senior engineers or engineering leaders.
• Provide the materials to the candidate 24 hours before the session.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the provided technical documentation and prepare an assessment of the system's strengths and weaknesses.
• During the session:
• Ask clarifying questions to deepen your understanding of the system
• Identify potential architectural improvements
• Discuss scalability, reliability, and maintainability considerations
• Suggest a prioritized approach to addressing any issues you identify
• Consider trade-offs between different potential solutions
• Be prepared to explain your reasoning and defend your recommendations when challenged.
• Focus on demonstrating both technical depth and pragmatic decision-making.

Feedback Mechanism:

• The technical panel should provide feedback on one particularly insightful observation or recommendation the candidate made and one area where their analysis could be improved.
• Give the candidate 10 minutes to respond to the improvement feedback, explaining how they would refine their analysis or recommendations.
• Observe how the candidate handles technical disagreement and whether they can adjust their thinking based on new information.

Activity #4: Cross-Functional Collaboration Scenario

This exercise assesses a candidate's ability to collaborate with stakeholders from other departments, navigate competing priorities, and communicate effectively with non-technical colleagues—essential skills for a Director of Engineering who must regularly interface with product, business, and executive teams.

Directions for the Company:

• Create a scenario involving a challenging cross-functional decision, such as:
• Prioritizing technical debt reduction versus new feature development
• Responding to a major production incident affecting customers
• Planning resources for a strategic initiative with tight deadlines
• Explaining technical constraints that impact a desired product direction
• Assemble a panel of 2-3 people representing different functions (product, business, operations).
• Brief the panel on their roles, priorities, and typical perspectives.
• Schedule a 45-minute simulation session.

Directions for the Candidate:

• Review the scenario and prepare for a cross-functional meeting where you'll need to represent engineering perspectives while collaborating on a solution.
• During the 30-minute role-play:
• Listen actively to understand each stakeholder's needs and constraints
• Clearly articulate technical considerations in non-technical terms
• Propose solutions that balance competing priorities
• Negotiate compromises when necessary
• Build consensus around a path forward
• After the role-play, spend 15 minutes explaining to observers your approach to the situation and why you made certain choices.

Feedback Mechanism:

• The panel should provide feedback on one aspect of the candidate's collaboration approach that was particularly effective and one area where they could have been more persuasive or accommodating.
• Ask the candidate to explain how they would incorporate this feedback in future cross-functional interactions.
• Observe how the candidate balances advocacy for engineering needs with empathy for other departmental priorities.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much time should we allocate for these work samples in our hiring process?

These exercises require significant time investment from both candidates and your team. We recommend spreading them across 2-3 separate interview sessions, with the Engineering Strategy Development exercise potentially happening as a final round. In total, expect to dedicate 3-5 hours of interview time to these exercises, plus preparation time for your team.

Should we use all four of these exercises for every Director of Engineering candidate?

Not necessarily. Consider your specific needs and the aspects of the role that are most critical for your organization. You might select 2-3 exercises that best align with your priorities. For example, if technical architecture is particularly important, prioritize that exercise; if team management is the biggest challenge, focus on the Team Challenge Simulation.

How do we ensure these exercises don't disadvantage candidates from underrepresented groups?

Provide clear instructions and evaluation criteria to all candidates. Ensure your evaluation panel is diverse and trained on bias awareness. Standardize your feedback approach and be flexible with scheduling to accommodate different circumstances. Consider offering candidates multiple options for demonstrating their capabilities.

What if a candidate pushes back on doing these exercises due to time constraints?

Be transparent about why these exercises are important for your decision-making process and the value they provide to both parties. Consider offering compensation for extensive time investments, especially for the strategy exercise. Be willing to accommodate reasonable scheduling requests, such as splitting sessions across multiple days.

How should we weight these exercises compared to traditional interviews?

These work samples should be a significant factor in your hiring decision, as they provide the most relevant data about how candidates will perform in the actual role. However, they should complement, not replace, behavioral interviews that assess cultural fit and career trajectory. A balanced approach might weight work samples at 50-60% of your overall evaluation.

Can we adapt these exercises for remote hiring processes?

Absolutely. All of these exercises can be conducted via video conferencing. For the strategy presentation, use screen sharing. For role-plays, ensure all participants have good audio quality. Consider providing slightly more time for remote sessions to account for potential technical issues.

The Director of Engineering role is pivotal to your organization's technical success and future growth. By incorporating these practical work samples into your hiring process, you'll gain deeper insights into candidates' capabilities and significantly improve your chances of making the right hiring decision. These exercises not only evaluate technical and leadership skills but also give candidates a realistic preview of the challenges they'll face in the role.

For more resources to enhance your hiring process, check out Yardstick's suite of AI-powered tools, including our AI Job Description Generator, AI Interview Question Generator, and AI Interview Guide Generator. You can also explore our example job description for a Director of Engineering for additional insights.

Ready to build a complete interview guide for your Director of Engineering role? Sign up for a free Yardstick account today!