I'm a Senior Software Developer. I was asked (again) by my manager to be part of the recruitment process as a technical examiner (to ask super hard to answer questions).

Last time (it was also the first time) I was the technical recruiter and it was fun for me as I obtained new knowledge about other developers' skills and how people behave on the other side of table and about salary expectations (this was the best part).

Now, I don't want to be a technical examiner because:

  • I have more interesting things to do and
  • my company does not care about new employees (the one I recruited last time has just left the company after only 3 months of work because he got a better offer and my company didn't want to stop him; the company prefers to get another cheap employee).

So can I just say "no" and not participate in the recruitment process? After all, I'm just Software Developer and being a technical examiner is not part of my responsibilities (I have to check my contract on that matter). Or maybe should I ask for some kind of compensation for wasting my time (this is how it appears to me) in the recruitment process?

  • 6
    Your second reason is 'jumping to conclusions'. You see the one I've recruited last time has just left the company after 3 months of work because he got better offer as proof of my company does not care about new employees. It's unusual that someone accepts another offer only for the money.
    – user8036
    Jul 15, 2015 at 12:42
  • 5
    From your post, it appears you have no other interest than doing what you want to do. Fine. You should understand that you'll be seen as less of a "team player" when it comes time for performance reviews, pay increases, and promotions. It depends on the company culture, but in many instances, an insistence on only doing software development work and everything else being "not in my job description" will likely see you leaving the company sooner rather than later, either voluntarily, or otherwise.
    – Kent A.
    Jul 15, 2015 at 13:15
  • 7
    Ignoring the false premise, as long as your company is paying you it's their time to waste, not yours. Employees that refuse reasonable requests outside their core tasks or find themselves regularly bringing up the words "job description" are the first to be replaced for lacking a "can-do attitude". Frankly, while the question title is interesting, I'm voting to close this as a rant.
    – Lilienthal
    Jul 15, 2015 at 14:16
  • @Lilienthal - As long as the part of the "can-do" doesn't include a willingness to waste the company's money without saying anything. Otherwise, you're just a drone who does what they're told without any consideration or feedback to improve things. Assembly line workers don't even do that anymore.
    – user8365
    Jul 15, 2015 at 16:17
  • 1
    @JeffO Taking part in the interviewing/selection process at work is not a waste of money. It's a cost of doing business. Do we want to minimize this cost? Of course. We do that by putting our best people on the task, since it takes far more effort and time to get rid of a dud than it does to turn them away in the first place.
    – Kent A.
    Jul 15, 2015 at 16:20

5 Answers 5


So can I just say "no" and don't participate in the recruitment process? After all I'm just Software Developer and being a technical examiner is not par of my responsibilities (I have to check my contract on that matter).

Clearly, your expertise is helpful in the interviewing process. It's a testament to your abilities that you are asked again to help out. Simply saying "No" might come across as a negative - as someone unwilling to help the company.

Instead of just saying "No", you could ask if you can avoid helping out with the interviewing/recruiting so that you can focus on development.

Most contracts say something on the order of "and other tasks as deemed necessary". It's impossible to list out every detail of a job to the extent that you could know ahead of time exactly which tasks you must perform, and which other tasks aren't required. And roles evolve over time.

Or maybe I should ask for some kind of compensation for wasting my time (this is how it appears to me) in the recruitment process?

Probably not.

We all have activities that we'd rather not do, but which will help the department/company. We usually don't get additional compensation, just because we'd rather not do them.

While you might consider it "wasting your time", the company might view it as "using your particular skills to help out in an important process".

Instead of asking for additional compensation, just remember this extra work when your review time comes. It adds a nice layer to your accomplishments - one that may put you ahead of other Developers at your company. Adding value to the company tends to be good for your career over time.


Senior software developers not wanting to be part of the recruiting process - is this a joke?

  1. If senior developers don't want to be the ones asking (and evaluating the responses to) tough questions, who else in the firm do you think is available and competent to do it? Asking the team lead to do it make sense, but there are only so many team leads around and vetting candidates is something they can delegate wholly or partially to the seniors on their staff.

  2. They hire someone you can't stand because you didn't want to be around when they interviewed him. What right do you have to complain?

  3. Every job has its scut work. Your non-cooperative attitude is more likely to be remembered than anything positive you did. The fact that you can only be counted on to work on tasks that interest you - that's probably not going to go over well with your management. You have a right to state a preference but once the hammer comes down, either you comply or you go.

  • 1
    1. Not "senior developers" but 1 senior developer in particular me. 2. "What right do you have to complain?" The same when I would have interviewed him. 3. It's not only that I'm not interested but also I think it's waste of my time becase later company too easily let those new employees leave and whole process needs to start again. Jul 15, 2015 at 11:34
  • 5
    You waste your time, the company wastes its money. The company's money is theirs to waste and they have the right to waste their money. As long as you work for the company, your time belongs to the company. You have the right to tell the company that they are not using your time well. As long as they pay you, they have the right not to use your time well. Jul 15, 2015 at 11:44
  • 4
    "What right do you have to complain? The same when I would have interviewed him." If I were your boss, I'd tell you immediately that you are spouting b.s. Because you REFUSED to be there when we interviewed him. And because you REFUSED to interview him and you're telling us that you don't like him, you want us to go through time and expense of interviewing ad hiring again. You are costing us money. Jul 15, 2015 at 11:49

Whoever they hire, you are going to have to work with. That should be incentive enough right there to be on the interview panel. Think about some of the people you rejected the last time. Would you really want them to be hired because they didn't get a good technical evaluation? Do you really want to work with that guy who really doesn't understnd the basics of his profession? What impact would that have on your code base, your own workload and your team's ability to deliver the product? Why don't you care passionately about those things?

Yes this is normal part of a senior developers duties and an important one. Senior devs are generally expected to alot more than program. No it is not appropriate to ask for extra money to do it.


Rather than an interactive technical interview, you could suggest this alternative to your management using the reason that being present takes a lot of your time away from productive coding (or whatever):- You could write down a series of technical questions and provide that as a technical test to be given to the candidates, using standard fixed duration (20-30 minutes is common), which you then mark against your answers after the interview and provide feedback to the interview decision makers.

This way you don't personally have to be present and the candidate is still given a technical evaluation. As long as you change the questions fairly regularly (and don't let candidates take the question set away with them) it should remain fairly effective.

Technical tests within the interview are common solution to the problem of needing technical personnel to be present in the interview.


It's a bad idea. Of course you can ask to opt out of a task, but you should do it in a more logical and definitely more diplomatic way.

Indicate that it appears this new person doesn't have to be too technically skilled, so maybe you can just review resumes and that's enough. Show where your time is being spent and how that is more beneficial to the company. They don't pay that much anyway, so how big of a loss is it really to make a bad hiring choice in this case? Another option would be to only interview the person they plan on making an offer. That's not such a time-suck.

Be careful about making it about some personal preference. If you don't think you'll do a good job, just say so. My guess is even a half-hearted effort by you is 10x better than what anyone else brings to a technical interview.

This is a good experience for you especially if you want to go into any team lead or management. If you ever want to work on a quality team and at least have people next to you that you can get along with, be a part of the solution. If you only approve of quality people and the offers are too weak, eventually something is going to have to give and it doesn't have to be your standards.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .