Why Vibe Coding Won’t Replace Traditional Coding Interviews: A Reality Check
There’s a growing buzz around the idea of replacing traditional coding interviews with "vibe coding"—essentially a one-hour session where a candidate builds a small product or feature while "thinking out loud." Proponents argue that this approach better reveals a candidate’s problem-solving style, creativity, and real-world skills. But does it really replace the depth and rigor of traditional coding interviews?
I don’t think so. And here’s why.
1. Vibe Coding Is Context-Dependent and Finite
While vibe coding can be a useful supplement, it’s a finite trend, not a holistic solution. It offers a quick look into a candidate’s immediate thinking process, but it’s highly dependent on the nature of the task and the candidate’s familiarity with the environment. Not every role or product fits into the “ship fast, break things” mindset. Many positions require deep technical knowledge, careful architecture, and long-term scalability planning that simply can’t be captured in an hour.
2. Depth and Long-Term Skills Still Matter
In an interview, we’re not just looking for someone who can quickly prototype something flashy. We’re looking for someone who can write maintainable code, anticipate edge cases, and think about performance and security. These skills come to light when candidates are given deeper problems that force them to consider the trade-offs, optimizations, and engineering principles that underpin robust software systems.
3. Culture Fit Is Crucial, and It’s Not Just About the Code
Every organization has its own culture and values. Some prioritize speed and experimentation, while others emphasize stability and collaboration. The way you evaluate candidates should reflect what’s important to your company. If you’re a fast-moving startup, maybe vibe coding aligns with your need for scrappy builders. But if you’re a large-scale enterprise managing critical infrastructure, you’ll want engineers who think about compliance, reliability, and long-term maintenance.
It’s not about replacing one evaluation style with another—it’s about aligning the process with your organization’s DNA.
4. Trends Come and Go, but Fundamentals Remain
The tech industry loves trends—from pair programming to whiteboard interviews, from take-home assignments to now vibe coding. But trends are just that: temporary shifts in practice. What remains constant is the need to assess core competencies: problem-solving, technical knowledge, communication, adaptability, and the ability to work in a team. Vibe coding may offer a fresh lens, but it doesn’t replace the fundamentals that hiring managers have relied on for years.
5. A Balanced Approach Is Key
Rather than throwing out traditional coding interviews in favor of vibe coding, we should think about integrating the best of both worlds. A comprehensive evaluation might include:
- A coding challenge to assess fundamental problem-solving and technical depth.
- A system design session to evaluate architecture skills and trade-off reasoning.
- A vibe coding/product build segment to observe how the candidate works under real-world constraints and communicates their thought process.
- A behavioral interview to gauge culture fit, collaboration style, and adaptability.
This approach ensures we’re not just hiring someone who can impress in an hour, but someone who can thrive in the long run.
6. Other Considerations You Might Be Missing
- Candidate Experience: Overloading interviews with trendy formats can be stressful and might favor extroverts over introverts. Not everyone is comfortable thinking out loud while building under pressure.
- Bias Risk: Vibe coding can inadvertently introduce bias. It often favors candidates who are good performers or charismatic communicators, not necessarily those with the best technical abilities.
- Scalability: For larger organizations, vibe coding may not scale well as an interview practice. It’s resource-intensive and might not fit into high-volume hiring processes.
Finally
Vibe coding is a tool, not a replacement. It offers a new perspective on candidate evaluation, but it’s not a silver bullet. Ultimately, hiring decisions are about understanding people—their skills, mindset, potential, and cultural alignment. The goal should be to blend the old and the new, not to abandon proven practices in favor of the latest trend.
A thoughtful, multi-dimensional interview process will always beat a one-size-fits-all approach.
Comments ()