You’re a non-technical founder who needs to hire developers. But how do you evaluate someone when you can’t read their code or assess their technical skills directly?
This guide provides practical methods for evaluating developers even without technical expertise. You’ll learn what to look for, what questions to ask, and how to make confident hiring decisions.
The Non-Technical Evaluation Framework
You can assess developers on four dimensions without being technical yourself:
- Evidence of shipping - Have they built things that work?
- Communication quality - Can they explain things clearly?
- Problem-solving approach - How do they think through challenges?
- References and reputation - What do others say about them?
Let’s break down each dimension.
Dimension 1: Evidence of Shipping
The best predictor of future building is past building. Look for proof that they’ve shipped real products.
What to Look For in Portfolios
Strong signals:
- Products that real users actually use (not just demos)
- Complete applications, not just features or components
- Projects with visible complexity (authentication, databases, integrations)
- Live, working links you can actually click
Weak signals:
- Tutorial projects everyone does (todo apps, weather apps)
- Only partial contributions to larger projects
- Lots of “in progress” without finished work
- Beautiful designs with no functionality
Questions to Ask About Their Work
For each project they show you, ask:
- “What does this do and who uses it?” - They should explain clearly without jargon
- “What part did you build?” - Clarify their specific contribution
- “What was the hardest problem you solved?” - Listen for specific, detailed answers
- “What would you do differently?” - Good developers are self-aware about improvements
- “Walk me through how this feature works” - Can they explain their own work?
Red Flags
- Can’t demonstrate anything they’ve built
- Only has group projects where their contribution is unclear
- Descriptions are vague (“I worked on the backend”)
- Gets defensive when asked about specifics
- Everything is “confidential” with no public work
Dimension 2: Communication Quality
Communication matters enormously for non-technical/technical collaboration. Evaluate their ability to:
Explain Technical Concepts
Ask them to explain something technical in simple terms:
- “How would you explain APIs to someone non-technical?”
- “What’s the difference between frontend and backend?”
- “Why might an application be slow?”
Good responses:
- Use analogies and everyday language
- Check your understanding along the way
- Adjust complexity based on your feedback
- Make you feel smarter, not dumber
Bad responses:
- Drown you in jargon
- Get impatient when you don’t understand
- Assume knowledge you don’t have
- Make you feel stupid for asking
Ask Clarifying Questions
Give them a vague requirement:
- “We need to build a feature that lets users collaborate.”
Good responses:
- Ask clarifying questions: “What kind of collaboration? Real-time? Async? What user actions?”
- Propose options: “We could do this three ways…”
- Think about edge cases: “What happens if two people edit at once?”
Bad responses:
- Immediately start describing their solution without understanding the problem
- Don’t ask any questions
- Give generic answers without specifics
Written Communication
Review their written communication:
- Are their emails clear and organized?
- Can they write documentation you understand?
- Do they respond to questions directly?
For remote work especially, written communication is critical.
Dimension 3: Problem-Solving Approach
You can’t evaluate technical solution quality, but you can evaluate how they approach problems.
The Problem-Solving Interview
Present a hypothetical scenario:
“Imagine we’re building a marketplace app. Users report that it’s very slow when there are many listings. Walk me through how you’d approach diagnosing and fixing this.”
What to listen for:
- Structured thinking: Do they break the problem down?
- Questions first: Do they gather information before proposing solutions?
- Trade-offs awareness: Do they consider pros and cons of approaches?
- Prioritization: Do they focus on high-impact areas first?
- Communication: Can they explain their thinking to you?
Good responses include:
- “First, I’d want to understand what ‘slow’ means. What operations are slow?”
- “I’d measure before making changes to confirm the actual bottleneck”
- “There are several possible causes; I’d start by checking the most likely ones”
- “We’d need to balance performance improvement with development time”
Red flags:
- Jump straight to solutions without understanding the problem
- Single-minded focus on one approach
- Can’t explain their reasoning
- Dismiss concerns or trade-offs
Handling Ambiguity
Startups have ambiguous requirements. Test how they handle this:
“A user says ‘the app doesn’t work.’ How would you respond?”
Good approach:
- Ask clarifying questions (What browser? What were you doing?)
- Systematic debugging approach
- Clear communication to the user
Bad approach:
- Assume they know the problem
- Blame the user
- Give up without investigation
Dimension 4: References and Reputation
References are your most reliable evaluation tool. Use them well.
How to Check References
Ask for specific references:
- Previous managers or technical leads
- People they collaborated with directly
- Non-technical stakeholders they worked with
Questions to ask references:
About their technical work:
- “How would you rate their technical skills relative to peers?”
- “What kinds of projects were they best suited for?”
- “Were there areas where they needed more support?”
About their collaboration:
- “How did they communicate with non-technical team members?”
- “How did they handle unclear or changing requirements?”
- “Were they easy to work with day-to-day?”
About their reliability:
- “Did they meet deadlines consistently?”
- “How did they handle pressure or difficult situations?”
- “Would you hire them again? For what kind of role?”
Reading between the lines:
- Enthusiastic, specific praise = strong signal
- Generic praise = lukewarm signal
- Hesitation or qualification = caution signal
- “They’re good, but…” = listen carefully to the “but”
Online Reputation
Research their public presence:
- GitHub: Do they have active contributions? Quality code? Collaboration history?
- LinkedIn: Endorsements? Recommendations? Career progression?
- Stack Overflow: Do they answer questions? Help others?
- Twitter/Blog: Do they engage thoughtfully in technical discussions?
Don’t expect everyone to have large public profiles, but complete absence of online presence in tech is unusual.
Getting Technical Help with Evaluation
You don’t have to evaluate alone. Get help from:
Technical Advisors
Find someone technical who can:
- Review candidate portfolios and code
- Conduct technical interviews
- Give you a thumbs up/down on technical competence
This could be a friend, advisor, or paid consultant.
Fractional CTO
A fractional CTO can help you:
- Define what you actually need to hire
- Screen candidates technically
- Evaluate portfolios and past work
- Conduct technical interviews
- Negotiate with technical context
This is often worth the investment for critical hires.
Paid Trial Projects
Instead of interviewing, have candidates complete paid work:
How it works:
- Define a small, relevant project (8-20 hours)
- Pay a fair rate ($500-$2,000 depending on scope)
- Evaluate the actual output, not interview performance
What you learn:
- Can they deliver working code?
- How do they communicate during the project?
- What’s their actual work quality?
- Are they reliable with deadlines?
Tips:
- Make it a real task you actually need
- Provide clear requirements
- Set a realistic deadline
- Be responsive to questions
- Have someone technical review the output
Evaluation Checklist
Use this checklist for each candidate:
Portfolio Review
- Can show completed projects with real users
- Can clearly explain what they built and why
- Projects relevant to your needs
- Working demos/links available
Communication
- Explains technical concepts clearly
- Asks clarifying questions
- Written communication is clear
- Adjusts communication to audience
Problem-Solving
- Takes structured approach to problems
- Gathers information before proposing solutions
- Acknowledges trade-offs and alternatives
- Can handle ambiguity
References
- References are positive and specific
- Collaboration feedback is good
- Would be hired again
- No major red flags
Cultural Fit
- Work style matches your needs
- Communication style works for you
- Seems genuinely interested in your project
- Reliable and professional
Common Evaluation Mistakes
Overweighting Technical Tests
Traditional coding challenges don’t predict job success well. They measure:
- Algorithm knowledge (rarely used in real work)
- Performance under artificial pressure
- Preparation for that specific format
They don’t measure:
- Ability to ship complete products
- Communication and collaboration
- Real-world problem solving
- Working with ambiguous requirements
Consider alternative assessments like paid trials or portfolio reviews.
Ignoring Communication Skills
A developer who can’t explain their work to you will struggle throughout your collaboration. Communication isn’t a “nice to have”; it’s essential, especially for early hires.
Hiring for Credentials
Big company names don’t guarantee startup fit. A Google engineer may struggle in a 3-person startup. Look for:
- Evidence of working in similar environments
- Entrepreneurial mindset and adaptability
- Self-direction and ownership
Rushing Due to Urgency
Bad hires cost more time than waiting. A few extra weeks finding the right person beats months dealing with the wrong one.
Skipping References
References are your most reliable signal. Always check them, and ask probing questions.
Key Takeaways
- You don’t need to be technical to evaluate developers effectively
- Focus on four dimensions: shipping evidence, communication, problem-solving, references
- Look for proof of completed work, not just skills or credentials
- Test communication directly: can they explain things to you?
- Check references thoroughly: this is your most reliable tool
- Get technical help (advisor, fractional CTO) for important hires
- Consider paid trials to see actual work, not interview performance
- Don’t rush: bad hires cost more than patience
With the right approach, non-technical founders can make excellent technical hiring decisions.
Need help evaluating technical candidates? Get matched with experienced technical leaders who can help you hire confidently.