rajdev

Recalibrating Hiring Manager Needs

Raj DevHead of Talent

Raj discusses how his recruiting team functions as a business within a business, as well as how he calculates confidence indices on employees they’ve hired to improve the interview process and recalibrate internal ideas about what makes a great candidate.

Episode Transcript

00:00 Rob Stevenson: Hello, everyone, and welcome back to another classic installment of your favorite recruiting show. I am still Rob Stevenson, still at the helm, still chuffed to my giblets to be broadcasting from the cozy, cozy, most salubrious confines of Hired HQ in San Francisco, California. If this is your first time tuning in, here’s the bangers and mash. Every week, I will be bringing in my favorite people in the recruitment space, directors of recruitment, heads of talent, VPs of TA, and they are all going to do primarily one thing: Talk Talent To Me. And today, I have a real good one lined up for you. My guest, Raj Dev, served all sorts of recruiting roles over at Wells Fargo, he then served as the VP of Talent Acquisition and Analytics at Tesla, now he’s the Head of Talent at Credit Sesame, and he has some really great ideas about how to build a talent engine to avoid future technical debt to position the talent team as its own business within the business.

01:00 RS: So if you’re out there and you’re building your talent team, or you’re trying to correct some large, company-related talent ills, then Raj has some great advice for you. We also got into this notion of Confidence Indices, which basically compare employee performance to how the team felt about that employee in the interview process, which allows you to measure how good certain interviewers are, or to identify what parts of the interview process signify future high performers. It’s all really good stuff. So please join me in giving a very warm, loving Talk Talent To Me welcome to Credit Sesame’s Head of Talent, Raj Dev.

[music]

02:11 RS: Raj Dev is in the house. Raj, how are you? Welcome.

02:17 Raj Dev: Doing well, Rob. Thanks for having me here.

02:19 RS: Yeah, so glad you’re here. You’ve done such amazing work at Credit Sesame, and before that, Tesla, so I was really excited at this chance to sit down and chat with you.

02:26 RD: Well, thanks for having me again, and super-impressed with the work that you do as well. I think I reached out and told you that this is required homework for my team.

02:36 RS: Oh, I love that. And I’m glad that the… That’s really flattering and I’m glad that the podcast listeners can’t see me slipping you a 20 under the table to say that. [laughter] This will definitely make its way to my boss in some way or another. But no, that’s really wonderful and it’s why we do it, it’s why this thing goes out is to help people, so that made me feel really good when you said that. I’m really curious to hear about Credit Sesame, and what have you been working on lately over there?

02:58 RD: Rob, were hiring for a Director of Product Development and User Experience, so if there’s anyone out there that has a candidate that looks good, that might be a fit for Credit Sesame, send him my way.

03:08 RS: Yeah, definitely. Is that one of your harder roles?

03:10 RD: I’d say so. A lot of the ones that are more multifaceted in the Bay Area, especially for the creative segment, that market is dense like a lot of the analytics roles, so it’s particularly hard to hire for. Also, each company, even though there may be a lot of creatives out there, each company has specific characteristics for what they’re looking for, which makes it particularly hard to get that perfect match.

03:37 RS: Right, definitely. What’s the sourcing been like for that? Are you using retained search? Do you have your own sourcers? How are you going about building pipeline?

03:43 RD: We’ve got our own team. Yeah, they’re doing a great job, but it’s still hard, so we could use the help.

03:47 RS: Yeah, yeah, definitely. What are the things that are specific to Credit Sesame that make this hard to drill in and find the right person?

03:54 RD: Well, we’ve got a high bar, so the talent that we have is A-plus talent, and we’re pretty serious about that. We’re also serious that the people that come onboard Credit Sesame share the passion for what we do; what we wanna do is improve the credit wellness of our customers, of our members, and we really wanna put a dent in the universe. And so all those people that really have that passion to not just do a job, but make a change, it’s really hard to find that. And so when we find that, it’s great. When we find that, along with the skills match and a culture fit, even better.

04:31 RS: So that they need to be particularly bought in to the mission. At what part in the interview process do you bring that up? Is it… Makes sense to try and pitch them on the mission and goals of the company early on, like in the phone screen, and then kinda sense out how important it is to them? How do you figure out that they’re gonna have that kind of shared passion?

04:51 RD: Yeah, that’s a good question. What we ask of any candidate, or what we expect of any candidate, is that they do their homework. And so on the web, wherever you’ll see us, you’ll see that mission that we wanna help our members improve their credit wellness. And so just doing the basic due diligence that you would do before you come on site, you should have a sense of what we’re doing. So that’s the first step is just an awareness of what it is that we do. And then the next thing we look for is some type of interest. And the interest with any sort of mission comes from a belief that there is something bigger than ourselves that you wanna contribute to. Those that are… The people that are more transactional in nature, more mercenary in nature, are probably not a great fit for Credit Sesame.

05:45 RS: Right, right. That can be challenging in the beginning when you say… Of course, you want your candidate to have done their homework. And when you ask, “What do you know about Credit Sesame?”, you hope that they’ve at least gotten as far as your About Us page, right?

05:57 RD: Right. Right.

05:57 RS: [05:57] ____ And read about that. In some cases, though, maybe if you… In the case where you’ve reached out to them, you’ve sourced them, maybe they don’t know, is it okay for them to take some time to sort of lean a little bit into the… And not be really, really well-versed right off the bat?

06:13 RD: When we first reach out to the candidates, we talk about Credit Sesame and what we do. So it really is just a matter of remembering what the first point of contact with Credit Sesame said about Credit Sesame. There’s not a lot of due diligence that might be necessary.

06:32 RS: Got it, okay. So you mentioned you have a couple… Your own sourcers, you’re generating this pipeline within your own team. What’s the rest of your team look like?

06:40 RD: We’ve got sourcers, we’ve got recruiters, and then we’ve got some folks on the ops side that help manage the scheduling that help with vendor management, program management, and also new employee advocacy, getting referrals at a company our size. Referrals tend to be a self-limiting source of candidates, but we’re a little over 100, and so it’s still a really productive source.

07:09 RS: Right. Interesting that you said self-limiting, because if you didn’t get diversity right in the beginning, then your referrals are gonna look like your company did, and so it’s gonna be… It begets homogeny.

07:20 RD: Right, right.

07:20 RS: But if you were thoughtful and if you have put together a diverse workforce, then referrals can be a really good channel ad infinitum, no?

07:28 RD: That’s a great point. With referrals, if you’re gonna send people along in the same proportion of your referral stream, the ones that finally end up to on-sites and then get hired, then that problem certainly exists. If it’s a protected class issue and you understand the difference between where you’re at right now and where you wanna be, you should be able to control for that, and that’s something, if you’re small enough, you should be able to eyeball and see where the discrepancies are and be able to control for that. I think the more insidious factor are some cultural traits, that it’s hard to see because you’re a part of that culture, and those cultural traits, you may not even understand whether they’re negative or positive. And so, because your panelists on the interview panels, because what you look for, you’re going to tend to match with what already exists. You could have… You could run the risk of exacerbating a negative cultural trait. So I’d say that’s the harder problem to resolve.

08:42 RS: Right. And then… But being conscious of it is step one, and then there is unconscious bias training, that kind of thing. There may be some other vendors and technologies that can assist with that, but getting it right early is probably key.

08:52 RD: Yeah, and the unconscious bias training that you’ll have, I think a lot of that is more DNI.

08:58 RS: Yeah.

08:58 RD: And so it could be… And there are lots of other biases involved, so if you have a representative bias where all the people in product development, for example, are tall, or all the people in… Which isn’t a protected class.

09:14 RS: No. [chuckle]

09:16 RD: You might see product development people and unconsciously select against them because you’re just only used to seeing successful product development people as tall. And in a small company, you can easily imagine that happen, where all three people are named David, or all three people are tall women.

09:32 RS: Yeah, yeah, definitely. That’s really interesting. So that all falls under the recruiting ops role…

09:38 RD: Yes.

09:38 RS: Obviously the employed referral part.

09:40 RD: Exactly.

09:41 RS: I’m seeing that title pop up more and more, which is exciting because historically, managing the employee referral program, like vendor management, that’s usually been someone’s job in addition to their regularly scheduled programming, right? That’s just like whoever your recruiter is, that is their all-purpose role, or sometimes they [10:00] ____ an HR person or the recruiting coordinator takes it on out of eagerness to prove themselves, good on them, but also not fair to maybe make that one person’s job. So you said the recruiting ops person is doing referrals, vendor management, are they look… The scheduling. Are they looking at other kind of metrics and that kind of thing too, and helping you with KPIs?

10:22 RD: Yes, but let me divide that recruiting ops people…

10:26 RS: Okay.

10:26 RD: Or multiply that into three people. So there’s one person that’s doing vendor and program management, another person that’s doing candidate coordination scheduling, candidate experience, another person that’s doing events, referrals, being the new hire champion. So there are three different people.

10:45 RS: Yeah, definitely it sounds like you have that infrastructure in place and all those individuals cranking in their areas to make you this cohesive unit. How do you think of that unit in terms of the rest of the business?

10:56 RD: Well, having the infrastructure in place early on is pretty important. A lot of people think of infrastructure as physical infrastructure, IT infrastructure, vendors or process, but having the location, having the nut in the right place, the bolt in the right place, the I-beam in the right place, this right person in the right place, without anyone extraneous to the process is really important right now. As you get bigger, making those tweaks to fundamental infrastructure become harder and harder and harder.

11:27 RS: Yes, definitely. Have you seen those… That technical debt grow and into sort of a machine where bolts are flying off in all kind of directions because it wasn’t built as lean or cohesively in the beginning?

11:43 RD: Yes, yeah, many places. As a matter of fact, I would say most places. You said something about this being a new role that you’re hearing a lot about, and a lot of these roles that we’re talking about right now are new and you’re hearing a lot about. I think in the old, older way of recruiting, a recruiter did a lot of things. A recruiter might do their own sourcing, or you have someone that’s in support that’s doing coordination, that’s also managing the vendor’s stack, that’s also thinking about referrals as a part-time job. And so because of that lack of clarity of role, you don’t have that role specialization. You have people doing things that they might not be best suited to do.

12:31 RS: Right.

12:32 RD: And so, for companies that have been around for a few years without the opportunity to do things right the first time, it’s easier to just continue doing what you’ve been doing. And so… Sure, you see that all the time where you have people with five jobs…

12:46 RS: Yeah.

12:46 RD: And they’re distracted during the day because they really don’t know how to parse out their responsibilities so that all five jobs are being done well. They’re torn in different directions and there’s probably a mismatch between their set of abilities and interests and the job in front of them.

13:05 RS: Definitely. So you’ve seen it kind of fall apart at the larger scale, which gives you the advantage of… As you’re building a team, a smaller team, you can put that infrastructure together to make sure that doesn’t happen down the line. If I’m a recruiter at a small to medium business and I’m thinking about how the team is gonna be built out and I don’t have that advantage of… It’s funny to say seeing things go horribly wrong is an advantage, but if I don’t have that experience, how can I thoughtfully build my team and think about my own responsibilities so that as the team grows, you don’t end up with that mess?

13:39 RD: That’s a big question. I’m gonna be as brief as I can. So…

13:44 RS: I got all day. [laughter] I don’t know about our listeners, but I’m good.

[laughter]

13:49 RD: So let me mildly correct you, you had said something about bolts flying off and things in disarray, and I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a situation where bolts were flying off or things were in disarray. I think what I’ve found are people that had their hearts in the right place that were trying to do the best job with what they had and with leadership, that might have been all that they knew and all that was taught to them, and so it was functioning, it just might not have been an optimized system. So when Henry Ford made the car, he didn’t find that bolts were flying off of carriages, he just knew that there was a different way of doing things where you can make a car in an assembly line fashion with specialized roles and everyone had their swim lane or their job to do. I don’t wanna mix too many metaphors here.

[chuckle]

14:46 RS: We’ve got carriages [14:47] ____ swim lanes, I’m with you.

[laughter]

14:50 RD: But something is better and no one knew it could be better. So back to the question at hand is, how do you start when you’re trying to do things right at a smaller mid-sized company and you wanna do things right? I think the first thing to do is to conceptualize it as a business. Now, with Henry Ford, it was assembly lines and taking raw material like steel and turning that into Model As and Model Ts and all the other models. But that process of creating value doesn’t really depend… Necessitate an assembly line. It’s a pretty standard value creation chain. You’re taking a bunch of inputs and you’re imagining how they get transformed into their final product, the output, and then what kind of infrastructure you might need beneath that.

15:41 RD: So for example, for recruiting, your input is candidates, or passive candidates even, and then you’re gonna take those inputs of passive candidates, source them, and then have some type of filters, some analytical assessment tools, and it could start with a sourcer going through a whole bunch of profiles, it could end with an online analytical tool, it could be para-programming, but all of those pieces of the value chain represent your assessment piece of the value chain. And then after that, you want to take that person that you’ve given offer to, hire them, put them in a seat on day one, start a new hire program so that as soon as possible, they’re as functional as possible and they’re not only functional in terms of being able to perform the job that we hired them to do, but they’re also integrated with the culture systems and processes of Credit Sesame.

16:55 RD: And so that’s the final product. And then underneath it you have all your vendor tools, your recruiter training, recruiter comp, you have some administration that has to occur, you have vendor management, process management, program management. So thinking about that as the infrastructure [17:14] ____ and the value chain on top of that, now you can start to diagnose where you need people where something might be wrong.

17:22 RS: Got it, okay. So then if you start with that framework, and then if things aren’t passed from one to another, then you start drilling and like, “This is… It’s broken or there’s a bottleneck or it’s not perfect.”

17:32 RD: Exactly. Understanding the human body is essential before you start diagnosing what’s wrong with someone.

17:39 RS: Of course, yeah, yeah.

17:40 RD: And when you have a recruiting organization where one person occupies three levels of the recruiting stack and is doing two pieces of the value chain at opposite ends of the value chain, it’s not that it can’t be done, but you run the risk of a real issue occurring.

18:00 RS: When you say value chain, does that just mean all the value that recruitment provides as its own sort of function, or what was that?

18:08 RD: That’s right. So someone is looking at profiles on LinkedIn, and someone is running around trying to make sure the new hire is onboarded correctly. So they have to be of split brain, and you can’t be in two places at once, even though life needs you to be at two places at once. So something is gonna break, it’s just a matter of time. And at at the same time they’re handling vendor management, well, there’s gonna be a time during one particular day when you need that person to do eight hours of vendor management, four hours of new hire onboarding and seven hours of sourcing because of some critical role that has to be sourced for and they can’t all be done at once, and if you do try to do them at once, you’re gonna have inefficiency with that person going back and forth between those… Among those three roles.

19:03 RS: Yeah, of course. And lets gets into force planning a little bit where in start up certainly there will be people who… There’s this compulsion like be here and I’m like, “Oh no, I can do it”, you wanna be the person who says yes to everything and just get stuff done but perhaps your role or whoever the talent leader is to map this stuff up and be like, “This person is spending their time here, here and here, we need to hire another person” or we at least need to pass around these responsibilities so that their work makes sense in context of itself and that it actually can be done in a single work day and when you say things like, “Oh I don’t know what we would do without Debra, it’s like, “Alright, well, you should either pay her more or hire someone else to do this stuff and you’re like, “Oh, this will all fall apart if she wasn’t here.”

19:44 RD: That’s right, yeah, pausing is really important and that doesn’t mean you can’t go fast, being in a start-up means you need to go fast, you have to be nimble, you not only have to go fast, you need to be able to change directions and that’s different from hurrying, so you should be able to go fast but not be in a hurry.

20:02 RS: I like that. How do you envision your team in relationship with the rest of the business?

20:09 RS: Well, thinking about talent, thinking about recruiting as a business with all the functions of business. We’ve got a brand, we’ve got operational infrastructure. We have incentive, we have talent development, we’ve got administrative issues, we’ve got a vendor platform, we’ve got the value chain, just like any other portion of the business, just like all of Credit Sesame or any other business.

20:32 RS: So, using that framework, you can start to have business to business discussions. And what we’re trying to provide is a fully functioning high value new Credit Sesame teammate. And we wanna make sure we deliver that teammate at a really efficient price. So we wanna make sure our sourcing cost of hires is as low as possible. We want to… We wanna do demand planning. You had mentioned workforce planning. And so, what’s the expectation of when someone needs to be hired? And then we can think through, “Okay, when do we start sourcing for that particular hire?”

21:09 RD: Right.

21:09 RS: Unlike a lot of manufacturing, there isn’t an ability to do just-in-time hiring unless… That’s what contractors are for. And so you need a little bit of a lead time, and understanding future needs allows you to plan accordingly.

21:23 RD: Got it. And not to be pejorative to the dignity of a human person, but here I go. A hire is effectively your product, right? That is like if you view your talent team as a microcosm of the business, as a business in and of itself, and hiring managers are your customers, and you satisfy your customers by giving them new teammates, new Credit Sesame, what do you call yourselves? Do you have like a…

21:47 RS: Teammates.

21:48 RD: Sesamisians? Credit Sesamisians?

[laughter]

21:51 RD: You can steal that one. That one’s for free.

21:52 RS: Yeah. Yes. Sesimite. Sesimians. All of those things turned out to be a mouthful so, instead of going with tongue twisters, teammates seems to work.

22:02 RD: Teammates? Right. Right.

22:03 RS: And also everyone understands that.

22:05 RD: Yeah, exactly. It doesn’t come with the conversation. [laughter]

22:09 RS: That’s right…

22:09 RD: So, you deliver more teammates and that’s how you satisfy your customers sort of?

22:13 RS: Yeah, I would say fully culturally integrated onboarded enthusiastic engaged teammates that are ready to roll.

22:22 RD: Yes.

22:22 RS: So, I would add those things, as opposed to, “Here’s a hire.” And then, “See you later.”

22:28 RD: Right? Yeah, of course. And that’s… If you look at the customer success department in the company, it’s not enough that like, “Alright, here’s your hire. Like… Or here’s your hire/here’s your software. Good luck. Have fun.” The customer success person has to make sure that it works for them, that it’s… They’re successful on it and so… There’s onboarding in that process. There’s like, “This fits with your team, your team is using it.” And if you don’t do that, then they’re gonna leave. And in your case that looks like, they don’t trust the recruitment department, they’re not gonna take meetings with you, they’re not gonna be as invested in doing interviews, they’re not gonna trust the candidates you generate. There is like all the… I’m sorry my mind is kinda spinning right now and just… Just unpacking, like [23:08] ____ expanding this metaphor of recruitment as its own business.

23:13 RS: Yeah, I think that if you are able to think of yourself as a business owner, and I think that it’s important for all people who work in a startup to think of themselves as a business owner. At Credit Sesame we give meaningful ownership to all of our teammates who are full-time employees, and that is one of our cultural values, is ownership and excellence, and so we think of ourselves as an owner. And so I like to think of myself as an owner of not just a function, but a business. Already you can start to speak the language of any other function owner or a business owner. Right there.

23:53 RS: Second, you understand that as another business owner who has needs, you have needs as well. So, let’s create some business agreements amongst ourselves. Finally, if you don’t treat yourself and think of yourself and your team as a business, and you as a business owner, you run the risk of being at the beck and call of another department, other sets of people, and you’re… It doesn’t feel good first of all. But probably most importantly, you’re not organized enough to deliver lots of value, as much value as you could deliver.

24:33 RS: So, in a lot of companies, I think that… And it’s a spectrum, it’s not binary. In a lot of companies, you’ll find that recruiting is at the beck and call of other departments. So, I need something now, ‘ding ding ding’, and the recruiter will come. And there isn’t this notion of recruiting being a business that takes inputs and transforms it into outputs.

24:58 RD: Right.

25:00 RS: So, you’re going to not be able to think about things like infrastructure if you don’t feel like you’re running a business.

25:09 RD: Yeah. Yeah. Definitely.

25:10 RS: It’s not gonna come naturally to you.

25:13 RD: Right? And then it’s a… And you then don’t exude that to the rest of the business. And so then they view you as the ‘ding ding’ pitch in taxi rider.

25:22 RS: Yeah. My job is transactional, and my job is to be at the service of someone else instead of, “How do I optimize what I’m doing in terms of value delivery?” Which is a different attitude, which also involves creating a little bit of space so you can think through how you can maybe pause for a little bit, go fast, but not hurry.

25:46 RD: Right. So when you find yourself in that transactional capacity, how do you zoom out? How do you slow down? How do you reorient your team, the rest of the business?

26:00 RS: Meeting regularly to assess priority and being kind of ruthless with how you prioritize is important. And I think keeping each other honest and watching out for each other is important. So…

26:13 RS: Every morning we start out, at least the folks in the Ops… The people in the ops side of the recruiting department with something called Tahini time. Tahini being a sesame product.

26:26 RD: Right.

26:27 RS: And that’s where we think about things like infrastructure and also zoom out to see if we’re just being transactional, or we’re actually thinking about meeting some current needs, at the same time thinking about how we can do things better in the future.

26:46 RD: Okay, makes sense. So, forgive my clunky interviewing style, but I don’t have a seamless segue for this, but we had chatted earlier, you and I before about confidence indexes, in terms of the overall interview process and individual interviewers, and how that plays into your assessment process and how you can figure out who is the best interviewer. I’m just curious to kinda lob that softball up to you and hear you, like, “What does that mean in confidence index? How are they helpful, what’s the output from it? That’s not a question, but go.

[laughter]

27:20 RS: Yeah, no, and first of all it’s not clunky at all. I think, if you’re thinking about how to transform inputs to outputs and create the most value possible, what you wanna do is make sure you’re using everyone’s time as best as possible. If you’re interviewing the wrong people, or if you are assessing people incorrectly, then you’ve got an inefficiency, and you’ve gotta take care of that. And this is part of a quality control with any process, with any other manufacturing you’re gonna look at diameter of the ball bearing, or whatever, right?

27:51 RD: Right.

27:51 RS: You wanna see what you’ve produced, and make sure that you’re producing a high quality product. So we wanna make sure that the assessment is high quality as well. And so we started doing this at Solar City where we had a grade that the recruiters and the hiring managers would give to a candidate. And they do this in many places, and then based on that grade they’ll go ahead and make a decision. They’ll maybe talk extensively, if people are at the edge, whatever that threshold grade is. But often, or rarely I should say, do people revisit the grade three, six months, a year later, to see how that candidate actually performed? And what I wanted to do was somehow capture the intuition of the recruiters. It’s, especially for people in Silicon Valley, it’s a very analytically focused environment, and it’s hard to imagine that recruiters might have this 6th sense, or intuition.

29:00 RD: Right.

29:00 RS: But there is, if you read, ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow,’ by Kahneman, this whole notion of System 1 and System 2 thinking, there is that intuition that occurs, and it may be hard to explain. The one metaphor that just comes to mind, or a story that comes to mind is the story of, and I think this was in the prequel that Michael Lewis wrote, The Undoing Project, of Thinking Fast and Slow, where he describes this firefighter that marches into a building that’s burning. And he’s got his team with him, his crew with him, and it’s hot and the buildings are often hot and there’s fire all over the place. But for some reason he yells out, “Get out!” And he runs out of the building. And he didn’t know why, it was spontaneous, he used his intuition. And that intuition, when asked about it, when they probed, “Why did you run out of the building?” It’s because his ears got hot and he connected it with the floors buckling and falling through the floors. And so that was the signal that led him to say, “Get out of the building, right now.”

30:11 RD: Right.

30:12 RS: I think recruiters have that. Their ears might not burn, but they get this feeling about something. It might not be explicable, but it can be captured. And it can be captured with something like a Confidence Index. So if you look at how someone performed and rate them, and then call that the expected performance. And then three, six months, a year later, depending on lots of things, the actual role involved, and SDR would be something, a sales, a junior salesperson would be three months, maybe someone on the legal staff would be a year, an engineer maybe six months, rate that person again and find out what the actual performance is on a scale of one through five. And now you have a data pair, and you can simply graph that. And then you can line up all the data pairs, and then throw a trendline through it, a regression through it, and get an R-squared. And you can get a confidence of how well the person, or the recruiting department predicts talent.

31:07 RD: So, in that case the data pair is the feedback from the interview and then their performance down the line?

31:13 RS: Exactly, so it might be for you, Rob, it might be a 5-5, because of course you’d be rated a five, and you’d be performing at a five, right.

31:23 RD: Naturally. [laughter]

31:23 RS: For someone else, it would be a three and a five, or a five and a three, right?

31:27 RD: Right.

31:28 RS: You wouldn’t include the nose because you can’t evaluate the nose. But for all of the positives at least, you’d be able to assess, “Well, who is responsible for, or what happened with those false negatives that… I’m sorry, the false positives that came into your system?” And understand if it happens with a particular department, or a person, or wherever you want. You can let the data tell the story at that point in time.

31:55 RD: Yeah, definitely. And even in a more qualitative manner, you can look at this person ended up… What were the common threads between this person that they interviewed, or all these people who had high data pairs, right?

32:12 RS: Yeah.

32:12 RD: What were the common threads about them that we drilled in on, in the interview process and then that should be of a standard for the rest of the assessment, right? Every, when you assess the performance of someone down the line that is an opportunity to revisit the interview process, to revisit your assessment, even your job description, right?

32:29 RS: That’s right. Or it could be person specific. So, a lot of times hiring managers, rightfully so, have confidence because they’ve been a hiring manager, and have hired before, have this intuition about what they want in their teammate, in a person on their team.

32:52 RD: Yes.

32:53 RS: But that intuition may be an intuition as to who they get along with, rather than who performs well on a team. Or if they are a new hiring manager, it may be who might be a good person to have as a co-worker, rather than who would be easier to manage.

33:13 RD: Yes.

33:14 RS: So this is a way to check that.

33:16 RD: Yes.

33:16 RS: It’s also a way to validate the quality of what recruiters can provide. It also is a way to give feedback to hiring managers, in terms of getting those numbers to be closer to each other. A 3-3, 4-4, or 5-5, whatever it is. And what you can do is kind of explore. “Okay, if this person’s R-squared is low, then why is that the case? Where are the errors involved? Let’s diagnose” But at least now you have a tool to diagnose.

33:50 RD: Yeah, definitely, I wanna hear more about the actual calculation of the confidence interval.

33:56 RS: Sure.

33:56 RD: You said there’s, something to do with the regression and R-squared.

34:00 RS: Yeah.

34:00 RD: And I was a rhetoric major…

[laughter]

34:01 RD: So, I don’t know, I don’t know if that came up back in my education. I don’t know if we have time to do it right now. I know we have bars to catch, and seven-year-old daughters to pick up.

[laughter]

34:10 RD: But maybe I can follow up with you, we can put in a blog post, or you should come back in and do a round two, I think is the answer.

34:17 RS: I’d love that Rob.

34:18 RD: Raj this was really, really fascinating, thank you for sitting down with me. This is a blast, I can’t wait for everyone to hear this.

34:22 RS: Thanks for having me.

34:23 RD: And to all of you out there in Podcast land. I’ve been Rob Stevenson, Raj Dev has been Raj Dev, and you’ve all been amazing, wonderful, talented, recruiting pros have a spectacular week and happy hunting.

[music]

34:38 RD: Talk Talent To Me is brought to you by Hired, a double opt-in global marketplace connecting the best fit active talent to the most exciting recruiting organizations. If you would like to learn more about how we can help you find your next great hire, head to hired.com/employers and we’ll get started.