There are more developers available online than ever before.
You can find frontend developers, backend engineers, WordPress specialists, AI developers, DevOps engineers, and entire development teams within minutes.
So hiring a developer should be easy.
Strangely, it isn't.
The problem is no longer access to talent.
The problem is figuring out which talent is actually right for the job.
A tech stack isn't a job description
Imagine a startup needs someone to work on an application built with:
Next.js
TypeScript
PostgreSQL
Stripe
AWS
Searching for developers who know these technologies could produce hundreds or thousands of candidates.
But knowing Next.js doesn't necessarily mean someone can maintain a production application.
Knowing Stripe doesn't mean they've built complex payment flows.
And listing AWS on a profile tells you almost nothing about what they've actually done with it.
Skills are useful filters, but they're weak signals when used alone.
Years of experience can be misleading
Another common shortcut is filtering candidates by years of experience.
Need a senior developer?
Set the requirement to five years.
Problem solved.
Except software development doesn't work like that.
One developer might spend five years maintaining similar WordPress websites.
Another might spend three years building APIs, debugging production systems, deploying applications, integrating payment providers, and making architectural decisions.
The second developer technically has less experience.
But which one would you want debugging your SaaS application at 2 AM?
Context matters more than the number.
Portfolios don't tell the entire story either
Portfolios are useful, but there's another problem.
You usually see the final result.
You don't see the starting point.
Was the developer responsible for the entire application?
Did they only implement the frontend?
Were they part of a team of 15 engineers?
Did they make the architectural decisions?
Did they inherit an existing codebase?
A beautiful final product doesn't necessarily tell you what the person actually contributed.
This is why good technical hiring requires questions about decisions, not just outcomes.
Instead of:
"Did you build this?"
Ask:
"What was the hardest technical problem you encountered while building this, and how did you solve it?"
The second question reveals much more.
Communication is a technical skill
This is especially important when working remotely.
A developer can be excellent technically and still be extremely difficult to work with.
Imagine receiving this update:
"Backend almost done."
What does that mean?
Compare it with:
"Authentication and the user API are complete. I'm currently working on Stripe webhooks. I found an issue with failed-payment handling, so I expect to finish that tomorrow."
Both developers may have written exactly the same amount of code.
But one gives the client significantly more visibility.
Good communication reduces uncertainty.
And reducing uncertainty is incredibly valuable when someone is working remotely on your product.
The best developer isn't always the right developer
This is probably the most overlooked part of hiring.
Suppose you're building a simple MVP.
You probably don't need someone designing an architecture capable of handling 50 million users.
You need someone who understands that:
shipping a good product today can be more valuable than designing the perfect system for three years from now.
The opposite is also true.
If you're processing thousands of transactions, hiring someone whose experience consists entirely of small landing pages probably isn't a good idea.
Hiring should be about matching the complexity of the problem with the experience of the person.
Search is becoming the interesting problem
This is something I've been thinking about while working on NexoRush.
Traditional freelance search is largely based on categories, keywords, ratings, and filters.
But a buyer doesn't really want to search for:
React + Node.js + PostgreSQL
They want to say:
"I have a SaaS application with a slow dashboard and I need someone to figure out what's causing it."
The interesting problem is translating that request into the skills and experience required to solve it.
That starts looking less like keyword search and more like a recommendation problem.
Maybe we have enough filters
Freelance platforms have spent years adding filters.
Technology.
Location.
Hourly rate.
Experience.
Rating.
Availability.
Language.
All of these are useful.
But adding another filter probably won't fundamentally improve hiring.
The bigger opportunity may be understanding the problem first and finding people based on that understanding.
In other words:
Don't start with the developer. Start with the problem.
That's something I'm increasingly convinced will shape how online hiring evolves.
What do you think?
Would you rather search through developer profiles yourself, or describe your problem and let a system recommend the most relevant people?
Top comments (0)