Tali Rapaport

Job Seeker Expectations vs. Reality with Tali Rapaport

Tali RapaportCo-founder

Today we are joined by the Co-founder of Puck, Tali Rapaport. Tali is passionate about helping employees find the right work environment based on their specific stories. Tuning in, you’ll hear all about Tali and what drove her to start Puck. She elaborates on the importance of transparency in the job application process, why you need to connect with each individual person’s story, as well as the challenges she has encountered in her line of work. We also discuss the disconnect Tali sees in what employees hear and what they see about their roles as well as what she thinks people want to see when applying for a job. Next, we look into why day-to-day tasks are not selling points when searching for employees before diving into Puck’s use of podcasts and audio to tell personal stories. Tali also talks us through the way today’s work environment affects Puck, how candidates are matched with employees and vice-versa, along with why recruitment marketing is imperative. Finally, Tali explains what she sees as ‘storytelling’ in her line of work.

Episode Transcript

[INTRODUCTION]

[00:00:05] RS: Welcome to Talk Talent to Me, a podcast featuring the most elite talent leaders on the front lines of modern recruitment.

[00:00:12] FEMALE: We actually want to understand the themes of someone’s life. We want to understand how they make decisions, where they’re willing to take risks, and what it looks like when they fail.

[00:00:22] RS: No holds barred, completely off-the-cuff interviews with directors of recruitment, VPs of global talent, CHROs, and everyone in between.

[00:00:31] FEMALE: Once I went through the classes and the trainings and got the certifications through diversity inclusion, I still felt something was missing.

[00:00:39] MALE: Talent Acquisition. It’s a fantastic career. You are trusted by the organization. You get to work with the C-suite and the security at the front desk and everybody in between and everybody knows you.

[00:00:52] RS: I’m your host, Rob Stevenson, and you’re about to hear the best in the biz. Talk Talent To Me.

[INTERVIEW]

[00:00:59] RS: Talking talent with me today is the Co-Founder and CEO over at Puck. Tali Rapaport. Tali, welcome to the podcast. How are you today?

[00:01:07] TR: I’m well. Thanks, Rob, for having me.

[00:01:09] RS: I’m so pleased to have you. Can I tell you not to brag here, but I get pitched the CEOs and Founders of HR tech companies to be on this podcast a lot. I almost always ignore it, because usually it becomes a commercial. You are not pitched to me. You were introduced to me by Dubi Ben-Shoham, recent guests of the podcast and he just shared a little bit about your company. I was like, “I must speak with this woman. She sounds awesome.” Here you are speaking with me. I just wanted to share that detail. Thank you for doing this.

[00:01:40] TR: Thanks for having me. I feel very lucky that Dubi made the introduction.

[00:01:44] RS: The only way to get on this is not to pitch. If you take around her, I think. But in any case, we’ll get to all that in a minute. Tali, before we get too deep in the weeds, would you mind sharing a little bit about your background? Then what drove you to found this company?

[00:01:57] TR: Absolutely. Thanks again for having me, Rob. I’m originally a Florida transplant, but I’ve been out in San Francisco now for over a decade. Most recently, I was at Lyft at a time when the company onboarded a million drivers and our team grew by over 100.

[00:02:19] RS: Can I pause you quickly?

[00:02:20] TR: Yeah.

[00:02:20] RS: Because you’re not being, I’m interrupting you because you’re not being exaggerating like, we hired a million drivers. No, no. You hired 1 million people for that job, right?

[00:02:30] TR: Sure. Yeah, absolutely. The company hired 1 million drivers. My team grew by over 100. So I spent a lot of time looking at recruiting technology, even though I wasn’t myself a recruiter. I saw an opportunity and got excited about Puck. One of the things, while I was at Lyft, is that I had twins while I was at Lyft. So I know what it’s like to have a lot of responsibility. Lyft drivers have a lot going on. There are a lot of people at Lyft who are doing it, because they want to have flexible hours, because they want to be caregivers, in addition to driving.

It made me realize how ineffective traditional careers were pitching at these people, not the responsibilities, but the expectations required around what you need to succeed. I thought there was an opportunity to bring people and the workplace into clear view for people who are trying to make choices about jobs and careers. Now that turns out to be very top of mind today with resignations and reshuffling. I certainly felt that two and a half years ago, when we got started.

[00:03:46] RS: I’m glad you mentioned the expectations about a role because what you’re talking about there is just what does it take to be good at this job? What do we expect you to do in the role? Importantly, crucially, the flip side of that is, how can you structure your day or lifestyle around fulfilling those expectations, which is different from the standard nine to five, which has typically not been spoken about. It became more apparent, certainly for you at Lyft, but then also that just feels like a base expectation for any job now, once you say.

[00:04:16] TR: Yes, and yet most job descriptions and job ads, don’t talk to it at all. It’s not really transparent to someone who is in the market. What are the actual requirements to succeed at a role?

[00:04:32] RS: Is that the gap between hiring maybe on the full-time side versus the driver side that you had this huge scale of hiring at Lyft for actually 1 million people, not an exaggeration not like, we had gazillion drivers, a million humans signed up to do that job. Was that the challenge that you were seeing? Hey, we’re better at explaining the expectations of the role for our drivers and we are in the full-time zone.

[00:04:58] TR: I think, so one we would do definitely say, onboarding a million drivers because Lyft has spent a lot of time clarifying. It doesn’t hire them as employees, but I think there’s a few things. There are few takeaways. One is Lyft made flexibility, really top of mind in that job. So in that way, it did set the expectation. You knew that it was a flexible way to earn money quickly. That was the lead in the role as opposed to the requirements of your vehicle. I mean, if you look at a job description today, you lead with, these are the requirements of what your day-to-day is like, not to be honest, to sell, which is what is this company offer you. I think that comes from a time where there was more people than open jobs.

Now there’s two jobs for every candidate, something like that. It’s totally reversed. So the idea that you would lead with the responsibilities or the requirements for a job, instead of what is that job offer that’s great, that feels totally backwards, but that’s the standard today. So that’s one thing. Then if you’re talking about other things that we can take away in full-time hiring, one of them which we use, we offer as a product we use today ourselves as automated reminders. Meeting candidates where they’re at, means that they’ll start something, but maybe not finish it. We have them built-in, but we also use that and leverage that at Lyft to understand that someone may start a process and not be ready to finish it all at the same time.
Today is a sense of, read this long description, fill out this long form. Implies a level of intent and that I don’t think where there’s two jobs for every candidate people have. There’s just a mismatch there. Then the last one, I think is really important is that storytelling. Most drivers, again, they understood the flexibility, they had a friend who did the job and getting a little bit into career pages, companies tell stories through their employee value propositions, which are generally not specific enough for a candidate to understand.

Well, what does the job actually look like? Knowing that your company cares about doing good in the world, doesn’t tell me about what my experience is going to be like as an employee of the company. An employee value proposition isn’t specific enough, and it’s on the wrong place. So 70% of candidates don’t ever see a career page before they apply. If you’re doing it –

[00:07:40] RS: Does a fantastic stat.

[00:07:41] TR: Yeah. So if you’re spending a lot of money to tell a high-level story at the Career page that 70% of people miss, you’re not going to get the return on investment.

[00:07:50] RS: Yeah, yeah, exactly. It’s also so interesting that a couple of those things you mentioned about things that worked for onboarding drivers. Things like, it’s mobile first, and there’s this reminder which those two go together, right? Because if you’re doing something on mobile, guess what? Your mobile. So you may not have time to just sit down while you’re waiting for your dry-cleaning to come out to fill out the application, right? Those things should be wed. The other things you mentioned and feel like they were introduced in the interest of scale. How do we get this out to as many people as possible, but what you found was that it wasn’t about the scale, it was just about the one-to-one experience, right?

[00:08:26] TR: Absolutely. The idea of flexibility as an example, I mean, yes. It’s helpful that you want to onboard a million drivers, but if flexibility is a value in your workplace that could apply to 100 people, right? I mean, you don’t need to be communicating to a lot of people to communicate clearly and with specifics. I think that that’s part of the storytelling that people are missing. In fact, it should be easier for companies that are hiring 100 people than a million people, because they can tell more specific stories, but they don’t often have the tools. To be honest, I mean, I have a lot of empathy. The role of a recruiter is incredibly difficult today. To be able to be a marketer, a salesperson, a storyteller, it’s too many hats, I think for one team to be able to do it without help.

[00:09:23] RS: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. You also mentioned that just the expectations of the role, but also what it is that candidates want to see about a job, that there’s a disconnect between what they’re reading and what they’re seeing. Was that your own experience looking at jobs or was that what you were learning in interviews?

[00:09:41] TR: It’s a great question. It was my experience with the amount of drop-off that there is with candidates that don’t apply and understanding why is that. Then to get the answer about what people are missing. Then that was we did research at Puck to answer that question because we’re folks say that over 50% of people don’t finish job applications that started across all companies. Why is that? We answer that, to help inform what storytelling it should be and it’s really interesting. There’s a difference between what people put in a job description and the questions candidates want answered when applying to the job.

[00:10:20] RS: What is the gap there? What are people not seeing that they want to see?

[00:10:23] TR: The four things that are most commonly not in the job description that people want. One is, how does the company express its values? A company says it cares about the world. What does it mean? What does it do? The second one is who are the people on the team? What is the team look like? What are their backgrounds? Who is the team? The third career development opportunities, so a lot of people want to know, what does it look to be at your company in the long run? Do people stay? Is there an opportunity for growth? That’s rarely covered. The fourth one, is this work-life balance, timing, flexibility question around what are the real expectations to be successful?

Those are not topics that job descriptions talk to. They do a really good job at day-to-day tasks and company benefits and perks, but day to day tasks is a terrible thing to sell on. It’s not that the job descriptions don’t serve a purpose. I think they serve a really important purpose, but I think they’re part of the answer, as opposed to the right answer for how to sell an open roll.

[00:11:33] RS: Why is day-to-day task, a terrible thing to sell on?

[00:11:36] TR: Well, a great example of a day-to-day task would be having technical discussions with an engineering team. How does that differentiate you from any other company where you need to be an engineer? Right? I mean, that’s a common bullet in a job description.

[00:11:51] RS: Not a sexy bullet point. Yeah.

[00:11:53] TR: No, it’s not a sexy bullet point. It’s not a differentiated bullet point. It’s the part of the job that’s the same everywhere. Versus the part of the job that’s different. It’s like, if you sold jeans by sharing that there were clothes or that they’re made of denim.

[00:12:08] RS: Right, yeah. It’s like –

[00:12:10] TR: Versus something else.

[00:12:11] RS: Right.

[00:12:11] TR: Exactly and right. Tell me what I don’t already know.

[00:12:14] RS: I really love this, just exploration of what people want to see versus what they get in a job description – an application, because there’s an opportunity to shore that up, I think. I did it in my business. I’m going to make a comparison, because it’s the world that I know and understand, but I have this document that I send to guests. It’s basically like, “Hey, here’s some more about the recording process and the show itself and what you can expect and just check that out before we speak.” Then on the follow up call. If they read it, I asked, “Hey, do you have any more questions?” Guess what? All those questions if I start hearing them more than once I start putting them in the doc, right? Because I know that, these are the things people care about that I don’t address, I forgot to address.

If you’re on a phone screen with a candidate and you start getting the same several questions, that’s an opportunity to put that further forward in the funnel. That’s just a freebie for people out there. I do fear, though, that we’re a little ahead of ourselves because we identified the problem here, but I’m curious, just about the time in your experience, whether it was Lyft, or at what point you were like, “Okay, this problem is big enough that I should start a company to found it.” Then what you’re envisioning the solution would look like?

[00:13:23] TR: Yeah. It’s a great question. Our solution with Puck isn’t the same as the solution that Lyft used. I think, two things, one is, it’s big enough, I think, because of the frequency with which people are looking for work. There’s a lot of stats that people are looking every 18 months now, which is just basically means they’re on a constant job search. So that feels if you can help people with one of the most important decisions in their life that they try and make every 18 months, that felt like a good thing to work on, but in terms of the solution. I mean, it’s meta to be talking about it on a podcast.

Podcasts are a relatively new medium. They’re a great way for people to communicate and absorb information with a relatively low barrier to creation. I spent some time thinking before our conversation today, but I didn’t write a document that was collaborated on and agreed upon because it was set in stone. The expectation when people listen to my voice is not that it’s a contract and needs that level of specificity. So it’s a medium that people are both good at doing because we all have conversations and communicates information well. So it was a great opportunity to take that medium and apply it.

We actually looked at in comparison to video. I have this data from outside of Lyft, but in comparison to video, people are nine times more likely to participate in an audio conversation than a video conversation. If your goal is to create content that’s inclusive, that will let everyone participate and share their voice. You don’t want video. Video is great for the viewer, but there’s a lot of people viewing TikToks, and not as many people that are active creators. That’s true for all video platforms. I think audio has a very different dynamic there that lends itself really well towards the goals of an organization that’s trying to grow.

[00:15:33] RS: Are you launching podcasts for guests or are you capturing snippets that you can use in lots of different ways? How does the content take shape?
[00:15:40] TR: Yeah. We interview teams in podcasts. Then they distribute those podcasts in their recruiting process. You can see it on our website, as well as our customers, because we use it for our recruiting process as well. But yes, we produce the content and then give it to our customers to use in recruiting.

[00:15:59] RS: Can I tell you, this is another anecdotal thing that whenever I have people who are VP or above, or especially the CEO from Hired who I’ve had on the show a couple of times, when people are going to interview with those individuals, they Google their name, right? Then guess what pops up. This podcast they’re on. So I have this anecdotal data point that people are using these podcast conversations to prepare for an interview or a conversation. It just speaks to what you’re saying. It’s like, okay, people will engage with this and use it as a tool to do their research.

[00:16:26] TR: Yeah, 100%. Your sponsors are very lucky. I think that it’s a great way to prepare and from your guest’s perspective, it’s also a good experience to take control of the conversation. There’s a lot of places where the conversation about a company isn’t told by an individual. It’s not told by a person, it’s anonymous. It might not always be the latest, right? It could be that the content on a company about Glass door that was related to a layoff that happened from people that were impacting me. There’s so much that goes on in an anonymous forum, which is contributed to by a community. I think here with a podcast, you give someone the chance to tell a story. You can understand the context behind that story.

[00:17:17] RS: You mentioned before, one of the four things that people want to see when they’re applying versus what they get, is just some visibility into who they would be working with and who is working at this company? Who are these people? So far, all I’ve seen are a bunch of text fields me copy and maybe a video on a website, but that’s a lot different than the actual team I’d be working with or the experience that’s felt by an individual on the team. Is that the story you’re looking to tell with this audio?

[00:17:43] TR: Yeah, absolutely. It is, to a large degree, that personal story. It’s what happened to the person that helped them come to this role. What is their approach towards their team? How does their team work? Topics like that, that are really important to them and shape the lives of the people that work on their teams or work with them, but that are really far from the job description. The nice thing about it is it’s just so much more human. It’s so much easier to connect with a story about a person than it is to connect with a bullet point that says, having technical discussions with the rest of the stakeholders. That’s a bullet that someone will read and forget. We have a story of someone packing up their family and moving to Austin, in one of our customer’s podcasts. People remember that story and reference it. So it helps you as a storyteller, as a company, as an individual make a lasting impression on the people that are considering joining you.

[00:18:42] RS: Yeah, exactly. Is that embedded in a careers page? I know you said most people don’t look at careers pages. What about like, could you link to it in a job description, as opposed to saying that boring bullet point that’s like, you will have technical conversations with your co-workers. Is it just a link to be like, here’s an example of something you’d be working on?

[00:19:00] TR: Yeah. When we provide job pages, it’s right next to the job description. People listen and read, but people also use it in sourcing and interview prep. There’s a lot of places around the recruiting lifecycle that you can use the content.

[00:19:13] RS: Got it. You said also that people are job searching every 18 months. That feels like a very short period of time, but also it’s an opportunity for recruiters, because hey, basically, everyone’s on the market all the time, depending. Is that a temporary economic reality? Is this need for flexibility a temporary economic reality? How much does the current state of how people expect to do work influence the way that you present your company?

[00:19:41] TR: It’s a great question. If I had a crystal ball, I would love the answer. I don’t know what the world will look like in five years, but what’s so fascinating about today is the great resignation could also be called the great reshuffle, because it’s not that so many people are leaving the workforce. It’s that people are switching jobs, companies, careers, industries. There’s more changes in what people are doing than there had been in the past. I think, it’s one of the reasons that there were so many resignations in the last year. A lot of that is people looking for the types of things that are in that work-life balance, what is the work environment that an organization presents?

It is great to spend more time and effort and investment in getting your jobs out into the world, but if you don’t answer that question, as a company, about whether or not you fit the work-life that someone’s looking for. It’s a missed opportunity. So I think, certainly, with no signs of changing this year, next year, in the next few years, it feels like these are going to be the questions that are top of mind for a lot of people and they really go beyond remote work. That bullet of remote work doesn’t really answer the question that people are asking. I think when you look at the resignation rate, you can see that there are a lot of companies that are being impacted that still offer remote work. It’s not quite enough for people. It’s a little bit, you want to paint a more detailed picture of what that work-life looks like and what that work environment looks like.

[00:21:26] RS: I like that you call it the great reshuffling. That feels much more apropos because people weren’t great resigning from good jobs. The great resignation makes it sound like it was this mass labor protest, right? Then we were all opting out of capitalism and taking to the streets. Yeah, sure, there’s some of that. But I think mostly people like, you resigned from a job you didn’t like it. Then you went and got another job that you like a lot more. If you write great resignation, it blames it on a lazy worker instead of a bad employer. The issue is clearly the latter, because, guess what, people want to work and people are still working.

[00:21:58] TR: Totally or a misfit between the employer and the employee that they didn’t figure out before the process or that created, absolutely.

[00:22:07] RS: Yeah. You mentioned that the goal of, for example, a differentiating bullet point, how does the work-life approach fit in with someone’s desired work-lifestyle? That’s surely going to be different on a candidate-to-candidate basis, right? Is that we fit into this approach? Is that driven by a candidate? Are you only looking for the candidates for whom your work-life approach is a fit? Where’s the push pull here?

[00:22:35] TR: I think it is, first telling candidates what that high level approach is. I don’t think it belongs in a job description, because it’s not appropriate to that medium. I think sharing the information, but then also selling the candidate on what’s the upside of continuing with the process, even if that wasn’t exactly what you thought. I think in some ways, companies aren’t doing enough to sell themselves and what they offer, if they’ve thought through career development, if they have a great mentor program, if they have an l&d budget, if they do tuition reimbursement. It doesn’t really benefit most organizations, almost by definition for job seekers to just search on job title within a radius around them, and apply to all of the open roles.

Letting people come that just have a lot more interest in fit with what that employer wants by telling that story. That’s, I think, a win on both sides of the equation. In some sense, the very simple text search of job search technology of the past or today, but changing that is a race to the bottom. It’s like yeah, let’s just fit on title and salary. I don’t think that works anymore because the rate of keeping people on title and salary is just not enough.

[00:24:02] RS: Yeah, yeah. Even when you’re talking about selling the company and you’re mentioning things like you called out, oh, here’s a leadership development, here’s the personal development stipend. I do worry that differentiates you from a good amount of employers, but not all of them, at the top, that’s crowded too. I think people have realized that’s what you have to offer even just to be competitive. What do you say even beyond that? Say like, “Okay, now our competition or the other people who are talking about the perks that they provide. Let’s go one degree further.”

[00:24:34] TR: The best is the team because the team is totally differentiated. There is not the same team at every company. The right team for you is not the right team for me or the next person who comes in. So if you can sell on your team, that’s, I think the best. First of all, it’s the most true and transparent about what someone will be interacting with every day, right? But it’s also the most differentiated to you as an employer. You know what? You have that content. But if you look at how teams and individuals present themselves on LinkedIn, where half the people don’t have a bullet describing their employer, most people don’t describe their work in detail. It’s not necessarily just a list of names. It’s a more rich profile of what that team looks like.

[00:25:23] RS: Yeah. That’s a great call out, because even if you’re not competitive and you’re a use case, or you just done the expected in terms of perks, you are the only person who can offer, you will work with this set of people, right? That is going to be unique, no matter where you work, surely.

[00:25:37] TR: Absolutely. Unique, different and really compelling to the right people.
[00:25:43] RS: Say, someone’s listening to this, and they’re like, “Okay, I really need to completely reorient the way we are presenting the company to the job market out there.” Say that you were going to work with a new client, where do you start? Do you just go beat up their job page? Where do you start taking stock of how you can really make a difference?

[00:26:02] TR: No, we definitely don’t start by beating up their job page. We interview their team. We chat with them. We understand what are the needs and priorities of the company. Then we host their team on interview so that they can sell their team first. We do give them pages to present that information to candidates. I think focusing even if you didn’t use Puck and you did it internally, focusing on telling the stories of the people on your team is probably the right answer to recruiting today. I think the job of a recruiter has gotten so much harder, in this world of two jobs for every open candidate, because they also have to be marketers and salespeople. They’re not just in the screening side, so I have a lot of empathy for how much a recruiter has going on, but there are teams that do this in-person and in-house for the teams that don’t have the time and bandwidth. Puck is an alternate option.

I think that the one other call out is, it’s not really a project that is done. Companies that have marketing, they don’t do marketing and then turn off marketing, right? They tend to have a marketing team that operates alongside of their other functions to help market their business. So, unfortunately, the mindset change for recruiting teams is not how do I do a one-time project, but how do I incorporate that marketers mindset into how my team operates? Because unfortunately, marketing isn’t one-off. So I think there’s that mindset change that’s happening in the recruiting field. I think recruiting teams have the opportunity with that to take a real strategic seat at the table and help companies craft their strategy by informing the organization’s, what do they need to achieve their goals?

[00:27:57] RS: Yeah. Right now, I think you’re absolutely right, that the responsibility of marketing is being cast on lots of recruiters and people leaders, in addition to all of their regularly scheduled programming. At the same point, they still have to be in interviews and scheduling interviews and tweaking processes and sourcing, etc. Do you think that this could be a long-term dedicated role on a recruiting team, this is our recruiting marketer and that is their whole role is to optimize the color of CTAs and tell stories and generate content and all that?

[00:28:27] TR: In short, yes, for big enough companies totally. Puck is one outsourced solution, but there are other ways to tell these stories. I do think that it makes sense to have a recruiting marketing function or recruiting marketing person. In part, I think it’s helpful to bring in new people. I don’t think it’s also helpful as a feedback loop back to recruiting in that role of being strategic of giving them feedback about where there’s interest. How does the candidate market feel about this part of what we offer as an employer? Right now, the feedback back to a company if their job isn’t pitched the right way is that it’s difficult to fill it. That’s a very late and long time to wait for feedback.

I think a really smart and strategic recruiting marketing person can help companies understand more quickly how to craft that compelling message. At Puck we eat our own dog food on this, which means that we’re hiring and I rerecord a clip to go with it. We use the automated reminders that we talked about before, so that if someone isn’t ready to do everything in one day, they can do it over multiple days. Then we also as an organization have an individual offering, which is free where individuals can tell their stories. I think one of the things that we’ve seen is sometimes the individual is the CEO and sometimes it’s a sourcer.

You don’t always need the person doing the speaking to be the head of the organization. Often, someone telling the story that is in the thick of it is a really great way to tell an authentic story and have a more diverse and inclusive base of people to pull stories from. I think unlocking that mindset shift of the only spokespeople for my company are people with sea level titles is a change, but it’s a really, in today’s world, it feels the right direction to go, because people have microphones all over the internet. It’s quite empowering and it means a lot as a company for you purposefully to hand the microphone to someone that might not be in your C-suite today.

[00:30:52] RS: Yeah. It’s so obvious when you put it like that. You’re not hiring so many C-level, folks, right? You need to hear from the people who are the people, you’re hiring. Recruitment, marketing, maybe dedicated function as time goes by. In the meantime, we throw around this word storytelling like it’s easy, but if you take the example we had earlier of the bullet point that says you will be in technical discussions. We remove that in favor of some deliberate storytelling on the part of someone doing that job, but it can’t just be an audio version of them describing you’re in technical meetings having discussion. So what do we mean when we say storytelling? What is a compelling snippet from somebody sound like?
[00:31:33] TR: Yeah. It’s a great question. Beginning, middle and end, right? I mean, it sounds trite when I say that way, but actually think the difference between a storytelling and a bullet. I it’s so funny, I’m picking on this bullet, but to keep using it, having technical discussions is that there’s no beginning, middle and end in that story. There’s no first person. If instead, the story is about a time that you needed to launch something as an engineer where it required a lot of collaboration and you talk about how you went about and got how that collaboration happened. Who you needed to include? What your relationship is with your stakeholders? You said, “I had to launch a big redesign. I had to talk to the other engineering managers of the team. They were really easy, felt like they were on the same team as me. They prioritized time from their team to help our redesign launch. So we were able to, through technical discussions, find a solution.”

Now you’ve taken the idea, and you’ve turned it into a story. So it’s telling about a time, a moment that something happened. That’s just a much more powerful way to learn and to communicate an idea. It means you’re not going to tell a story for every one of the bullets on your job description, but that’s probably a good idea. Not every one of those bullets is really selling your job.

[00:32:52] RS: Exactly. Tali, last question. Is Puck a hockey reference or a Midsummer Night’s Dream reference?

[00:32:58] TR: Midsummer Night’s Dream.

[00:33:00] RS: It had to be. It could only be. Tali, this was such a delight chatting with you today. Thank you so much for sharing about your company and your experience and approach. I’ve really loved learning from you.

[00:33:09] TR: Thank you, Rob. This was a great conversation.

[OUTRO]

[00:33:15] RS: Talk Talent To Me, is brought to you by Hired. Hired empowers connections by matching the world’s most innovative companies with ambitious tech and sales candidates. With Hired, candidates and companies have visibility into salary offers, competing opportunities, and job details. Hired’s unique offering includes customized assessments, and salary bias alerts to help remove unconscious bias when hiring. By combining technology and human touch, our goal is to provide transparency in the recruiting process and empower each of our partners to employ their potential and keep their talent pipeline full.

To learn more about how we can help you find your next great hire, head to hired.com/tt2m

[END]