Startups move fast, but they don’t always have the resources to match. At RudderStack, where I was donning multiple hats, I faced a classic crunch: a hiring freeze clashing with our need for tech talent to fuel a growing data platform. Our solution was a multiple-cycle intern program that turned thousands of candidates into 10 full-time engineers (FTEs)—all remotely, on a shoestring budget. It wasn’t glamorous, but it worked. Here’s how we built that pipeline under pressure and what I learned along the way.
The Challenge: Talent in a Freeze
Our platform demanded sharp engineers, but cost controls meant no new hires. So we pitched an intern program—not the typical campus-visit kind, but a lean, remote one. The catch? We had to screen, assess, and onboard talent, starting with almost no playbook. Cycle one was a test run: limited applicants, no budget, and a tight timeline. By cycle four, we were sifting through thousands. Each round taught me something new about scaling talent fast.
The Approach: From Trial to Triumph
For the first cycle, I needed a tech interview tool—something affordable with features like coding assessments and scalability. I signed up for free trials of several platforms, testing them against our needs (think code quality checks, not just pass/fail). Three stood out, so I emailed their sales teams, scheduled demos, and grilled them on questions like plagiarism detection, library of tech questions and assessing responses. We picked one—let’s call it “Tool X”—and used its free plan with dual accounts to send assessment links to all candidates. The haul was small, but it proved the concept.
Cycle two, a few months later, brought hundreds of applicants. I screened resumes manually—focusing on projects and academic chops—then upgraded to Tool X’s paid plan for assessments. We evaluated top performers, offered internships, and watched them shine. By cycle three, applications hit thousands, overwhelming manual review. I pivoted: I compiled a list of top institutions (India’s premier tech schools) and prioritized candidates from there, scanning profiles for standout traits. Here’s a surprise—I found CSE grads from newer schools like IIT Jammu and IIT Ropar often outshone peers from older ones like IIT BHU or IIT Patna. CGPA mattered too: above 8 from top CSE programs was a safe bet, while non-CS grads chasing tech roles usually lacked depth. With Tool X’s seat limit (budget reality), I filtered ruthlessly and sent links after confirming availability. Of all the responses that we got, their code was checked for quality and originality.
Cycle four was smoother—we’d built a process. Screen via institution and profile, assess with Tool X, verify manually, offer. Each cycle refined our flow, and the results stacked up.
The Outcome: 10 FTEs and Counting
Across four cycles, we onboarded interns who didn’t just fill gaps—they excelled. Some were so good they became FTEs—10 in total, bolstering our engineering team without campus placement costs. Remote hiring saved travel bucks, and Tool X kept assessments tight. It wasn’t perfect—early cycles were scrappy, and screening thousands was a grind—but it delivered talent when we needed it the most, fuelling our platform’s growth.
The Takeaway: Process Beats Pressure
This program taught me that tech hiring isn’t just about tools—it’s about people and pragmatism. Picking Tool X after free-trial sleuthing? That’s resourcefulness. Screening thousands by leaning on data (institution rankings, CGPA trends)? That’s scale. Turning interns into FTEs remotely? That’s impact. My best practices: test tools before you buy, prioritize quality over quantity in filtering, and always verify outputs—automation helps, but humans seal the deal. Under pressure, I didn’t wait for permission—I built a pipeline that stuck. That’s the champion mindset: see the gap, fill it, and make it last.
Yaju Arya Dot Com 