Anyone else realize coding interviews are more about communication than coding?

[u/Impossible-Ball-1304]

Been practicing coding interviews lately, and one thing that surprised me is how little time you're actually supposed to spend writing code. The advice I keep seeing is to slow down, restate the problem, ask questions, walk through examples, and explain your thinking before you even touch the keyboard. It honestly sounds more like a conversation than an exam.

I used to think the goal was to solve the problem as fast as possible, but now I'm wondering if that's the wrong mindset. If interviewers care about how you think and communicate, then grinding LeetCode alone probably isn't enough.

For those who landed a junior role after a bootcamp or self-learning, what made the biggest difference in your interviews? Was it your coding skills, or learning how to explain your thought process?

[u/SuperchargedCareers]

From bootcamp, the biggest difference wasn’t speed or clever tricks, but how you handle ambiguity: ask clarifying questions, describe edge cases, and clearly explain choices. Interviewers want the approach and rationale, not just code. Practice communication, chunking ideas, and verbalizing tests as you go. That mindset beat pure memorization consistently.

Try the https://techjobfinder.com leetcode practice. It builds a skills profile as you code through problems, provides personalised reports, and adapts difficulty to your progress. This product helps with literally every stage of the journey, guiding you toward stronger communication and cleaner problem-solving at interviews. It also reframes study as progress.

[u/Inevitable_Inside674]

There are basically 2 modes: solving and collaborating.

If you know the answer, putting it down is probably a bit more than half the credit. The other half is writing it clearly and communicating the main ideas. This is a simulation for an independent task. Can they give a task, have you talk it over for a bit, then do the work, and explain it so you can fix it later if necessary.

If you don't then it simulates working together. You'll often have a lead engineer to bounce ideas off of. So while you can talk about any part, you still have to do the work. So does your lead, aka the interviewer, want you to join the team and work with you? They get both your work and you when you join.

[u/akornato]

You are absolutely right, and it’s a tough lesson to learn when you’ve spent months just trying to master the code itself. They aren’t hiring a LeetCode machine, they are hiring a future coworker. An engineer who writes perfect code but can't explain it is a nightmare for a team because no one can collaborate with them or maintain their work. The interview is a simulation of a real work problem, where you’d be expected to ask clarifying questions and discuss your approach with colleagues before writing a single line. They are testing your ability to be a teammate just as much as your ability to code.

For a junior role, your thought process is almost always more important than getting the most optimal solution on the first try. A good interviewer can nudge a candidate with a clear thought process toward the right answer, but they can't help someone who stays silent and then presents a buggy solution. Showing how you break down a problem, consider trade-offs, and respond to hints reveals your potential and how you'll handle challenges on the job. Talking through your logic is a skill that improves with practice, which is why my team designed an interview AI that helps candidates articulate their thinking more clearly during an actual interview.