Why ‘Slightly Better Fit’ Derails Senior IT Careers, According to Ehsan Ali

In a recent LinkedIn post, Ehsan Ali explores a common, yet often misunderstood, reason why senior IT professionals struggle to land high-paying roles, even after stellar interview performances. Ali argues that the final stages of senior-level hiring are less about a talent contest and more about a “defendability test” for the hiring manager.

According to Ali, the phrase “You were excellent. We just found a slightly better fit,” often delivered after multiple interview rounds, is not genuine feedback but a translation of a more complex internal dynamic. He explains that interviewers at this level often need to justify their candidate choice to higher-ups, such as Directors, GMs, or even the CTO.

“That sentence ends more senior careers than most people realise.”

Ali emphasizes that if an interviewer cannot clearly and concisely articulate why a specific candidate is the best choice, the decision often defaults to perceived safety. This means candidates with familiar company names, matching titles, or those who previously spoke in terms of outcomes rather than just activities might be favored, not necessarily because they are more capable, but because they present an easier decision to defend.

The Defendability Test in Senior Hiring

Ali, drawing from years of observing senior IT hiring, points out that this dynamic explains why many capable individuals get stuck. He highlights instances of Program Managers, Senior Managers, and Principal Engineers being overlooked in favor of candidates with less depth but superior positioning.

Positioning Over Capability

The core issue, as Ali sees it, is not a lack of capability but a failure in positioning and narrative. He states that the crucial judgment happens “upstairs” – in the decision-making room, where the interviewer must advocate for their chosen candidate. This advocacy requires a clear, compelling story that is easy to justify.

“Your value was just harder to explain.”

Ali recounts a client who, despite possessing strong experience, failed multiple final rounds with the same feedback. By shifting the focus from simply detailing experience to strategically talking about it and improving his narrative, the client successfully landed a $285,000 role. This success, Ali suggests, was not due to a change in his qualifications but in how he presented them.

The Real Gap: Positioning and Narrative

The common mistake professionals make, according to Ali, is to fix their interview answers, add more detail, or prepare harder. However, he argues that the real gap often lies “long before you walked in,” in the candidate’s overall positioning and the “altitude” at which they communicate their value.

“The people landing $280K-$380K+ roles aren’t always more capable. They are just easier to justify.”

For roles commanding salaries of $250,000 and above, the ability to make a defensible case becomes paramount. Ali clarifies that when senior professionals repeatedly hear about a “better fit,” it signifies that another candidate’s story was simply easier for the decision-makers to support, rather than a deficit in the candidate’s own capabilities.

“That is not a capability problem. That is a positioning problem.”

Ehsan Ali’s insights underscore the critical importance of strategic self-presentation and narrative-building in the competitive landscape of senior-level IT recruitment. He encourages professionals to focus not just on what they know, but on how effectively they can communicate their value in a way that is easily defensible to those making the final hiring decisions.