{"id":6068,"date":"2026-11-12T16:31:26","date_gmt":"2026-11-12T13:31:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/recruitment.by\/?p=6068"},"modified":"2026-11-09T13:56:11","modified_gmt":"2026-11-09T10:56:11","slug":"hire-tech-lead-solution-architect","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/recruitment.by\/eng\/news\/hire-tech-lead-solution-architect\/","title":{"rendered":"Hiring Tech Leads and Solution Architects: How to Assess Architecture Skills"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

A wrong senior developer hire usually costs you a few months. A wrong architect can cost you years. The decisions they make, about how systems are split, where data lives and which technologies the company depends on, are the most expensive ones to undo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet many companies interview tech leads and architects the same way they interview senior developers: a coding task, a generic “design a URL shortener” question and a chat about past projects. That tells you whether someone can draw boxes on a whiteboard. It doesn’t tell you whether they can make sound decisions under pressure, explain them to the business and get several teams to follow them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This guide gives you a practical way to assess architecture skills, from the first screening call to the final interview, plus what to know about hiring these roles in Belarus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Get the role right first<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

“Tech lead”, “software architect” and “solution architect” are often used interchangeably, but they’re different jobs. Many failed hires start with a vague job description. And if what you really need is a head of engineering or a CTO, you’re looking at executive search<\/a> rather than an architect hire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Role<\/strong><\/th>Main focus<\/strong><\/th>Typical scope<\/strong><\/th>What they produce<\/strong><\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Tech lead<\/td>Delivery and code quality<\/td>One team<\/td>Working software, code reviews, technical decisions within the team<\/td><\/tr>
Software architect<\/td>Internal structure of systems<\/td>Several teams or a platform<\/td>Service architecture, standards, technical roadmap<\/td><\/tr>
Solution architect<\/td>Matching technology to business needs<\/td>A project, product or client solution<\/td>Solution designs, integrations, estimates, trade-off analysis<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before you write the vacancy, list the problems this person will own in their first 6\u201312 months. Do you need someone to split a monolith, to design integrations for a new client, or to keep a team of eight shipping without the codebase falling apart? The answer decides which role you’re hiring for and which skills you should test.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The skills that actually matter<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Martin Fowler sums up software architecture as being about “the important stuff, whatever that is”<\/a>. Your interview process should find out whether a candidate can recognize the important stuff and handle it well. Here’s what to look for.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trade-off thinking<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Every architecture decision gives something up. Strong candidates explain not only what they chose but what they rejected and why. They talk about cost, complexity, speed of delivery and risk. Weak candidates describe their solution as if it had no downsides.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Non-functional requirements<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Features are rarely what breaks a system. Scale, reliability, security, cost and observability are. Good architects ask about these early. A useful checklist is the AWS Well-Architected Framework<\/a>, which groups them into operational excellence, security, reliability, performance efficiency, cost optimization and sustainability. You don’t need AWS to use it as a mental model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Clear documentation<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Architecture that lives only in someone’s head doesn’t scale. Look for people who write down decisions and draw diagrams other people can follow. Ask how they document their work, and whether they use formats such as architecture decision records or a structured diagramming approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Communication with non-engineers<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A solution architect who can’t explain a design to a product owner or a CFO will struggle, no matter how good the design is. The best candidates can translate technical choices into time, money and risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pragmatism<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Experienced architects usually prefer proven, “boring” technology unless there’s a good reason to do otherwise. They know when good enough is the right answer and when it isn’t.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Leading without authority<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Architects rarely manage the teams that implement their designs. They need to persuade, set standards and get buy-in across teams. Ask for examples of how they got other teams to adopt a decision they didn’t control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For tech leads: mentoring and balance<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Tech leads also need to grow people, review code constructively and balance delivery deadlines against technical debt. Watch how they talk about juniors and about trade-offs between speed and quality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Screening: what to check before the interviews<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

You can filter out a lot of mismatches before anyone spends an hour in a design session.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the CV, look for systems the candidate owned end to end, real numbers about scale (users, requests per second, data volume, team size), migrations they led and incidents they handled. These are signs of someone who has lived with the consequences of their decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Be cautious with CVs that list 40 technologies, describe “participation in architecture” without any decision of their own, or include only greenfield projects. Building something new is valuable, but running it for three years teaches you far more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two screening questions work well for almost any candidate:<\/p>\n\n\n\n