What if doing well in a tech interview isn’t always enough to land the job?A Reddit post making that argument has sparked a lively discussion among users, with some saying they’ve seen similar things during interviews while others believe candidates may be reading too much into a rejection.The discussion started on r/developersIndia with a post titled, “You may need to act dumb to get a job (Tech Interviews).”The Reddit user argued that some candidates could be rejected despite performing well because their technical knowledge might make an interviewer feel uncomfortable or even threatened.The theory is fairly simple: if an interviewer thinks a candidate is significantly more skilled, they may worry about their own position or authority within the team.The post suggested that candidates who walk out of an interview feeling they performed well but still don’t get an offer should keep this possibility in mind.
Should you really hide your skills?
The post also made a distinction between different types of interviewers.According to the Reddit user, managers and team leads may be more interested in hiring technically strong people, while candidates might need to be more careful when being interviewed by members of the team they could eventually join.The advice was to show what you know without making the interviewer feel as though you’re trying to prove you’re smarter than them.
That claim, unsurprisingly, divided Reddit.One user pushed back against the idea that every unexplained rejection is about an interviewer feeling threatened.“Assuming every rejection is because the interviewer feels threatened can be misleading,” the user wrote, pointing out that team fit, communication, salary and another candidate being a better match could all play a role.The commenter added that candidates shouldn’t have to “act dumb”, although knowing how to collaborate without making others feel inferior can still matter at work.
‘Managers and Leads are the ones who want dumb people’
Not everyone agreed with that interpretation.One commenter claimed the original post had got the roles backwards, arguing that managers and leads may sometimes prefer less-skilled candidates rather than technical interview panels.“It’s true. Important part is that actually Managers and Leads are the ones who want dumb people not the panel. You got that part wrong,” the user wrote.Others took a more humorous approach.One Redditor replied in Hindi, “Isme pretend kya karna bhai, mein hoon hi dumb fir bhi crack nahi ho raha interview.”Translation: “Why pretend, bro? I’m already dumb and still can’t crack the interview.”
Some Redditors say they’ve seen it happen
Another user said they had noticed what they believed was a similar pattern across several interviews.The Redditor, who said they were from a tier-2 IIIT, claimed that interview panels from less prestigious colleges had rejected them in several instances despite what they felt were strong interviews.“Tbh I saw this pattern across some interviews,” the user wrote, while stressing that this was based on personal experience.But there were also comments from people who described a very different kind of interview experience.One user recalled being mocked after struggling with difficult technical questions.They said some interviewers had responded with comments along the lines of, “What a pity, you don’t even know how to answer this basic stuff,” and questioned how the candidate expected to survive in the industry.The Reddit discussion doesn’t establish that highly skilled candidates are routinely rejected for intimidating interviewers. But it does highlight a frustration familiar to many job seekers: sometimes candidates leave an interview convinced they did well, only to receive a rejection without knowing why.And without feedback from the company, it’s easy for people to fill in the blanks themselves.