AI is changing how engineering teams work, but it may also change how technical recruiters think about hiring.
I spoke with Sunita, an engineering leader, about three scenarios I regularly run into in technical recruiting: hiring around a technology migration, evaluating engineers across different technology stacks, and figuring out where technical vetting should sit in the recruiting process.
A few of her answers stood out.
1. Start with the business initiative
I gave her a common recruiting scenario:
“I need a Playwright engineer for a migration. Or I need an automation engineer with Claude experience.”
Her response was essentially: what is actually driving the work?
She described several types of transformation happening across organizations, including financial systems moving to Oracle, HR system changes, and modernizing point-of-sale systems that may not have been upgraded in years. She also pointed to mergers and acquisitions, where organizations may need people who can help navigate technical and organizational change. Start with the business objective first and work your way from there.
Then there is AI.
Companies are giving employees access to AI platforms, but access alone doesn’t mean everyone knows how to use them effectively. Sunita emphasized the importance of using AI safely and securely, establishing guardrails, and having measurable expectations for where the organization should be six to 18 months from now.
The takeaway for recruiting is pretty simple:
A recruiter can know that a hiring manager needs AI, automation, playwright etc Playwright but understanding why the company is using that technology can provide much more context around the person they actually need to hire.
2. AI could make “fundamentals over stack” more relevant
We also talked about a situation I’ve seen from both the client and candidate side: a hiring manager wants someone with Java experience, while a qualified engineer may have a strong background in .NET.
Historically, that can create unnecessary friction around technical fit.
Sunita pointed out that the underlying fundamentals don’t change. Object-oriented programming is still object-oriented programming. Engineers who understand the fundamentals can often learn another language or technology.
I believe AI makes that even more relevant.
As engineers use AI to help them write and understand code, being tied to one specific language may become less important in some situations. The focus can shift toward whether someone understands the code, software hygiene, architecture, and scalability.
That doesn’t mean Java and .NET are interchangeable, or that specific experience no longer matters.
It does raise a useful question for hiring teams:
How much of the requirement is truly about the technology, and how much is about the engineering fundamentals underneath it?
For recruiters, I think this is where hands-on learning matters.
I’m not suggesting recruiters need to become software engineers. But if I’m recruiting .NET engineers, I can download Visual Studio, build a simple console application, use AI to help me create something, and then actually walk through what I built and understand the fundamentals behind it.
You learn differently when you actually touch the technology.
And I think that makes you a better technical recruiter.
3. Put an engineering layer into the vetting process
The third scenario was about technical vetting.
One of the problems I see managers running into is that a resume doesn’t always match the person behind it. A candidate may look strong on paper, but the recruiter may not have the technical expertise to determine whether the experience is actually worth advancing.
I asked Sunita whether she would support having an engineer serve as part of the vetting layer.
She agreed and expanded on the idea.
An engineer can help validate the candidate’s technical experience, but the value doesn’t have to stop there.
She described industry-expert-led mock interviews as a way to help candidates understand what to expect, identify areas they need to strengthen, and better frame their experience.
That can also build confidence before the actual interview.
There is another side to this that I found particularly interesting: the engineer can help the candidate evaluate the opportunity, too.
The interview shouldn’t only be about whether the company thinks the candidate is a fit. Candidates should also understand what they’re walking into and be equipped to ask better questions about the role and organization.
So an engineering layer can serve multiple purposes:
- Validate technical experience
- Identify whether a candidate is worth deeper consideration
- Coach candidates before the interview
- Help candidates better explain their experience
- Give candidates a better understanding of the opportunity
And that goes beyond simply checking whether a resume is accurate.
4. If you want to be great at technical recruiting, keep learning
When I asked what recruiters should do if they don’t know how to properly vet engineers, Sunita didn’t suggest a shortcut.
Her advice came down to two things: upskilling and allyship.
Spend time studying industry trends. Learn what engineers are working with. Stay current instead of relying only on what you learned years ago. Network at all levels and leverage the people around you.
Her point was straightforward: if you want to be the cream of the crop, you have to put in the cycles.
Modern technical recruiting requires being willing to learn enough to understand the work, ask better questions, recognize strong technical fundamentals, and know when an engineer should be brought into the process. Whether that’s rolling through platforms like W3schools, installing software and programming yourself or asking AI to help spin up a program and then walking through the various components.
I think the recruiters who actually spend time learning and getting hands-on will have an advantage over those who simply learn the latest terminology.
A big nod to Sunita for the time and insights!