Why pre-screen wireless power specialists before the technical panel
An efficiency number without conditions attached is marketing. The same system reports very different figures depending on alignment, gap and load, and the honest answer includes all three. Add human exposure limits, which constrain how much power can be moved at all, and you have the real engineering. A short screen asks what conditions the efficiency figure was measured under.
What actually matters when screening Wireless Power Transfer Specialist candidates
- 01
Technical depth
Probe magnetics fundamentals: coupling coefficient and Q targets, litz wire and ferrite selection, resonant topology choice (series-series versus LCC), and ZVS inverter design with GaN or SiC devices.
- 02
Work that shipped
Ask for shipped systems: Qi or Ki certified products, SAE J2954 EV pads, or industrial couplers, with DC-to-DC efficiency, air gap, misalignment tolerance and unit volumes.
- 03
Diagnosis under uncertainty
Test debugging of foreign object detection false trips, thermal runaway in ferrite, CISPR 11 radiated emissions failures, and ICNIRP exposure limit issues discovered late in validation.
- 04
Working across the org
Look for work with mechanical, thermal, firmware and regulatory teams: coil placement inside enclosures, comms protocol handshakes, and evidence packs for WPC or notified body review.
Pre-screening questions to ask Wireless Power Transfer Specialist candidates
12 questions grouped by what they test. Ask the same set in every screen and score answers on a consistent scale, or send them as an async video screen and compare answers side by side.
Systems they measured
3 questions01Can you discuss a specific project where you applied wireless power transfer?
Listen forA built system with power level, distance and measured efficiency all stated together.
Projects described without power or distance, or efficiency quoted without conditions.
02Which power transfer approaches are you most familiar with?
Listen forInductive, resonant and other methods compared, with the application each genuinely suits.
One approach proposed for every application, or the differences between them not understood.
03Do you have experience developing solutions for specific industries?
Listen forApplication constraints understood for a real sector, such as alignment tolerance or environment.
Applications described generically, or the constraints of the target environment unknown.
Physics understood
4 questions04Can you explain the working principle of wireless power transfer?
Listen forCoupling and resonance explained accurately, with the effect of distance on efficiency understood.
Explanation by analogy only, or the sharp fall in coupling with distance not acknowledged.
05How do you evaluate the efficiency of a power transfer system?
Listen forEnd-to-end efficiency measured with the conditions recorded, and losses attributed stage by stage.
Coil-to-coil efficiency reported as system efficiency, or measurement conditions not recorded.
06Which software or tools do you use for design and simulation?
Listen forElectromagnetic simulation used, with the results validated against measurements on real built hardware.
Simulation results reported as performance, or models never compared with a built prototype.
07Have you developed new methods or approaches in this field?
Listen forGenuine development described with evidence, and an honest account of what did not work.
Novelty claimed without evidence, or approaches described that violate basic physics.
Exposure safety
3 questions08How have you ensured the safety and reliability of these systems?
Listen forHuman exposure limits designed to, with foreign object heating and thermal limits addressed.
Exposure limits treated as a certification step, or metal object heating not identified as a hazard.
09How familiar are you with the regulations governing these systems?
Listen forEmissions and exposure regulation known per market, with testing planned into development.
Regulation unfamiliar, or compliance assumed to follow from using a standard approach.
10What testing have you conducted to validate the effectiveness of a system?
Listen forTesting across misalignment, load and temperature, with repeatability confirmed across several units.
Validation on a single unit in ideal alignment, or performance under load never tested.
Validated properly
2 questions11How do you handle unexpected problems during implementation?
Listen forMethodical diagnosis using measurement, separating electrical, thermal and mechanical causes in turn.
Problems solved by trial and error, or measurement not used to isolate the cause.
12Do you have experience training or mentoring others in this technology?
Listen forKnowledge transferred deliberately, with documentation others can work from after they leave.
Knowledge held individually, or no documentation of designs beyond their own notes.
How to score responses
Score every candidate on the same four criteria immediately after the screen. At this stage you are shortlisting for panel interviews, not making the final call.
Technical depth
35%5Explains coil geometry trade-offs numerically, cites measured k and Q values, and links topology choice to load range and efficiency.
Work that shipped
30%5Names specific launched pads or receivers with efficiency figures, gap and offset specs, and certification passed at an authorised test lab.
Diagnosis under uncertainty
20%5Walks through a real EMC or FOD failure, the isolation method used, and the shielding or firmware change that fixed it.
Working across the org
15%5Describes concrete negotiations over enclosure stack-up or magnet placement, and owns the compliance documentation handed to certification bodies.
An efficiency figure without alignment, gap and load attached is marketing. A one-way video screen asks for all three.
Try it on HirevireScreening FAQ
Process basics
How long should a pre-screening round for this role take?
Fifteen minutes across eight to ten questions, answered async. Enough to establish systems they built, test their understanding of coupling and efficiency, and check safety and validation.
How does this differ from a wireless charging engineer screen?
Charging roles usually target consumer products and established standards. This role often covers higher power or novel applications, so weight physics, exposure limits and validation more heavily.
Evaluating answers
What is the strongest signal when screening this role?
Efficiency quoted with conditions. Specialists who measure properly state alignment, gap and load together. Anyone offering a single percentage has repeated a figure rather than measured one.
How do I judge their safety knowledge?
Ask about human exposure limits. Real answers name the applicable limits and how compliance was demonstrated. Anyone who treats exposure as a certification detail has not designed to the constraint.
Go deeper on this role
Sanat has been hiring since 2012 and watching the recruitment industry change up close ever since, and turned that screening process into Hirevire's video screening platform. LinkedIn
