Knowledge Hub

What we have learned about hiring, written down properly.

Practical writing on how roles get defined, how candidates get judged, and why so much of both goes wrong. Everything here is readable without a form, and searchable once it is written.

Start here

Six questions, answered without the download form.

These are the questions people arrive with. Each answer is short on purpose, and each one points at the page that treats it properly.

How can we improve hiring?
Start earlier than the interview. Most of the improvement available to a hiring team sits in the week before anyone is sourced, when the role is defined and the criteria are agreed. Teams that fix the definition find the interviews get easier on their own.The four stages, in order
What makes hiring decisions fail?
Not one broken step, but a small loss of fidelity at every handoff. The business problem becomes a requirements list, the list becomes search terms, and by the decision the team is working from impressions rather than anything it can point to.Where the information leaks
How should roles be understood?
As a business problem before a list of requirements. A job description records what someone will do; it rarely records what the role exists to solve or what success would look like in a year. Everything downstream inherits whatever that gap leaves unsaid.Role understanding
How should candidates be evaluated?
Against the same definition, at the same depth, every time. Evaluation that changes shape between candidates produces opinions that cannot honestly be ranked. It also quietly filters out people whose experience is equivalent but described in different words.Candidate understanding
How should interviews be conducted?
Against criteria agreed before anyone was sourced, not criteria each interviewer brings on the day. An interview is most useful when it is testing specific claims the earlier stages flagged, rather than re-running a general assessment from scratch.Capability validation
What hiring trends should we know about?
We are not going to forecast. The shift that already matters is that screening is getting cheaper and faster for everyone, which makes the quality of the evidence behind a decision the thing that separates teams, not the volume of candidates they can process.What we mean by Hiring Intelligence

Something you want us to write about?

If there is a hiring problem you keep running into and cannot find a straight answer on, tell us. It is a better prompt than anything we would come up with on our own.