Hire the Second Version, Not the First [72]
The episode discusses redesigning SE hiring to evaluate coachability rather than polish by introducing a two-stage interview process: an initial coaching session with one manager, followed by a panel evaluation one week later, scoring the gap between versions rather than absolute performance.
Summary
The episode opens with hosts Nate and Ava discussing a hiring challenge where a technically brilliant but completely feedback-resistant candidate was hired, taking 11 months to recognize the mistake. They analyze why traditional hiring loops failed to catch this—they test rehearsed skills and score final performance rather than identifying what matters on day one.
The proposed solution is a two-round interview structure. Candidates receive a case study brief and present it once in a 30-minute session with a single manager (the dry run). This manager provides hard coaching similar to real deal preparation. The actual panel interview occurs one week later, with scoring based on the delta between versions rather than absolute polish. The first version simply confirms the candidate can present; the meaningful assessment is what changed and whether they implemented feedback authentically.
On logistics and cost, the speaker addresses concerns about adding presentations. With 12 candidates, absorbing an extra 30 minutes is manageable; across 200, they note that a bad SE hire consumes six months of a manager's calendar, making 30 minutes per candidate negligible. The coaching conversation replaced a screening call already in the process. Candidates are explicitly told version one is practice and the panel is what counts, maintaining transparency and avoiding perceptions of unfairness.
Additionally, managers now review CVs themselves before talent acquisition screening, and first real conversations are extended to 60-90 minutes with direct manager involvement rather than brief keyword-filtered calls. The speaker emphasizes that scoring splits into two questions: Did anything actually change? And did they change it their way? The second question carries more signal and reveals candidates who hold positions while remaining coachable—the ideal SE profile.
A critical concern surfaces: whether the coaching phase rewards mimicry over independent thinking. One candidate who incorporated feedback but explicitly retained their original approach and explained why it suited the buyer better received the highest score. The speaker also addresses objections from talent acquisition partners worried about legal defensibility, arguing that written, structured, identical coaching tied to the same brief for all candidates is more defensible than subjective panel scoring.
About this episode
Nate rebuilt his interview loop so candidates present a case study twice — once as a coached dry run, once for the panel — and the score is the difference between the two. Ava pushes back on the risk of rewarding mimicry, and they land on a two-question scorecard.
Key Insights
- The speaker argues that traditional hiring loops fail because they score final performance and test only the skills candidates rehearsed hardest, rather than identifying the competencies that determine early success (week three).
- The speaker claims that bad SE hires consume approximately six months of a manager's calendar, making the investment of 30 minutes per candidate to assess coachability economically justified even across large candidate pools.
- The speaker asserts that candidates who incorporate feedback while maintaining and justifying their original approach (holding a position while listening) represent the ideal hire profile for customer-facing technical roles.
Topics
Transcript
Hey there and welcome to Leading Pre-Sales, the show for solution engineering leaders who want to build teams that drive revenue and not just demos. My name is Tim and I'm the co-founder of SE Rockstars and together with Jan, we've coached over 350 solution engineers and their leaders across several dozens of companies. Every conversation you hear on this show is based on real coaching situations, real challenges, real problems that as leaders like you are dealing with right now. None of this is made up. We use AI to bring these stories to life through our two hosts, Nate and Ava, but the insights come straight from the trenches. Each episode gives you one actionable takeaway you can…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from Leading PreSales | The Solution Engineering Leadership Show
Retire The Technical Win Trophy [71]
The episode critiques celebrating technical wins too early in the sales cycle, arguing that a technical checkpoint means nothing if the deal ultimately fails. The hosts propose redefining technical wins as validation that you're still in contention (one of 2-3 vendors) and establishing specific post-POC activities rather than retiring the metric entirely.
Never Lie, Never Answer Reflexively [70]
Solution engineers often answer questions reflexively without understanding their context, which can damage deals even when the answer is technically honest. The key principle is distinguishing between genuine honesty and unfiltered explaining, and training SEs to ask clarifying questions before responding.
Stop Begging For Headcount [69]
An SE leader shares how building a capacity model instead of requesting headcount revealed that one AE was consuming 38% of pre-sales resources with below-average deal value, leading to better resource allocation and CRO buy-in without hiring three additional engineers.
When the ICP Moves, PreSales Pays the Bill [68]
When companies shift their Ideal Customer Profile (ICP), pre-sales teams bear the heaviest operational cost despite decisions being made at the executive level. Building a named second ICP with dedicated SEs before crisis hits—rather than after—enables survival when market conditions force a pivot.
Your CRO No Longer Wants a PreSales Department [67]
A CRO's desire to eliminate the presales department stems from revenue growth being concentrated in renewals and expansion, not new logos. The solution isn't renaming teams or restructuring, but strategically deploying SE skills to high-impact moments in the customer lifecycle with proper compensation alignment and narrow pilots before full organizational change.