In high-pressure interviews, it’s easy to fall into habits that hurt your performance. The good news: most of these traps are avoidable if you know what to watch out for.
1. Jumping straight into boxes
Many candidates rush to draw diagrams before clarifying scope. This looks rushed and scattered.
- Trap: jumping into architecture without context.
- Better: spend 1–2 minutes clarifying users, scale, and goals first.
Red flag: “So… I’ll just start with a React app and a Node server…” (before clarifying anything).
2. Listing buzzwords instead of reasoning
Dropping terms like “microfrontends,” “CDN,” or “GraphQL” without tying them to the problem signals shallow thinking.
- Trap: reciting patterns as if that’s enough.
- Better: say why you’d pick one for this scenario.
Red flag: “We’ll definitely need microfrontends.” Better: “If multiple teams need to ship independently, microfrontends could help.”
3. Over-engineering v1
Trying to design for a billion users on day one is a common trap. Interviewers want pragmatism, not fantasy scaling.
- Trap: designing with CDNs, sharding, and microservices for a toy app.
- Better: start simple, then explain what you’d add if scale demands it.
Red flag: “We’ll shard across three regions for availability…” Better: “For v1, a single region is fine. At scale, I’d replicate globally.”
4. Ignoring cross-cutting concerns
Forgetting accessibility, i18n, or offline-first makes you look junior. These are small mentions that pay big dividends in interviews.
- Trap: designing only for the “happy path.”
- Better: call out a11y, i18n, or offline gracefully, even if briefly.
Red flag: never mentioning accessibility. Better: “I’d ensure this flow is keyboard-accessible and handles RTL layouts.”
5. Rambling without structure
A messy, unstructured answer makes it hard for interviewers to follow. Even good ideas get lost if the delivery is chaotic.
- Trap: brain-dumping every idea as it comes to mind.
- Better: outline your flow: scope → constraints → architecture → trade-offs.
Red flag: “Uh… we could do CSR, or SSR, or… maybe GraphQL?” Better: “Here’s how I’ll structure my answer: first scope, then constraints, then architecture.”
Takeaway
Most candidates lose points not because they lack knowledge, but because they fall into avoidable traps under pressure. If you avoid rushing, skip the buzzwords, design for v1, remember cross-cutting concerns, and stay structured, you’ll stand out as a thoughtful, senior-level engineer.