For a technical/IC role (really, any role), I'd be alarmed if I wasn't given practical tests to verify I can actually back up my talk Agreed, and let me offer

For a technical/IC role (really, any role), I'd be alarmed if I wasn't given practical tests to verify I can actually back up my talk Agreed, and let me offer an anecdotal, real-world example. Before I was in this racket, I used to be a land surveyor. Because it's both technical and licensed (and btw, I'm not going to make an argument for licensure, just mentioning it as a qualifier), you had to take a written test and pass a rigorous interview before you were accepted as an apprentice land surveyor. The test involved trigonometry, plane geometry, algebra, property law, and basic statistics. The sit down involved attempts to surface red flags all the way down to testing if the candidate was afraid of dogs. And after passing that, then you were hired on as an apprentice which meant that all your work had to be reviewed and signed off on by a licensed PLS while you learned on the job and could eventually take the PLS exam yourself. Too often in software engineering, a candidate can jump through the hoops and get hired but even if their role is junior, they're essentially on their own except for code reviews. There's very little mentoring, because senior people are neck deep in work and nobody's got time for that. The company has to be committed to mentoring and carve out space and money for it in order for it to happen.