Creator here (shamefully submitted myself, haha). Happy to answer any/all questions or ramble on and on about the problem.
We basically think there needs to be a legitimately trustworthy service out there. Something that acts more like a a career coach instead of a position spammer. Something that understands your needs and specific situation.
Along the lines of "doing things that don't scale", we're completely human powered but technology assisted. There are a lot of things that are involved with career coaching or recruiting that are simply tedious -- we automate them away so we can better focus on relationships.
Do you have women on your panel of experts, and if not do you have plans to add women to your panel of experts? Asking not because "OMG MORE WOMEN IN TECH" but because the experience of being a woman trying to navigate a tech job is going to be different than a man's experience, so I would have more confidence in signing up for/recommending your service if I knew it catered more towards my specific demographic.
Also, what's your geographical range of companies you're working with? Companies all over the US? Only SV? Only West Coast? Worldwide?
Thanks Zach for doing this (both starting the company and coming here to Hacker News to answer questions).
Based upon what you're seeing:
1. Please rank these in order of importance:
- technical skill in one (or few) technologies
- broad technical skills
- years of experience
- raw smarts & ability to learn
- user/customer domain knowledge
- soft skills (project mgmt, systems analysis, etc.)
- cultural fit
- attitude & determination
2. What % of opportunities are in large companies vs. start-ups?
3. What % of a "typical" programmer's energy should be spent presenting themselves better vs. actually getting better?
4. What makes your coaches/experts so special? Do they have last names?
Nice concept. Best wishes to you and all your candidates.
For the salary negotiations, you take 20% of the difference. What do you do? Do you wait for the candidate to get an offer, then actually go talk to HR at the company on their behalf, or do you simply coach and tell them "Hey ask for $XX,XXX more!"
Are you hiring? While I'm hunting for tech work in NY even now, but have had a frustrating enough experience that I'm open to just tackling the problem directly.
Being that you are based in SF, do you think that you are equipped to provide services to job seekers in other cities (i.e. Austin, NYC, Boston, Raleigh, or Seattle)?
Looks like you're based in SF. Do you primarily work with West coast based companies? Because I love where I live right now (unwilling to relocate atm), and that limits my options quite a bit.
Hey Zach, Creator of InterviewBit here, we are doing something similar, however relatively less human powered, would love to hear your thoughts about what we are doing at InterviewBit.com
Jobstart works with job seekers to help them get hired, and gets paid when their recruiting clients hire their candidates. Sometimes Jobstart's candidates get jobs at non-clients, and Jobstart doesn't get paid.
Jobstart can help negotiate offers, for which they charge the candidate 20% of the difference between original and accepted offer.
I'm an independent agency recruiter, and it sounds a lot like what I do. I don't charge candidates for negotiating services though.
I agree that most recruiters aren't very good at what they are supposed to do. Positioning yourselves as coaches is a marketing strategy to differentiate from those recruiters, but what you are doing is basically the same thing as what a good (both skilled and 'benevolent') recruiter might do, no?
1) All of our coaches are experienced engineers.
2) We're much more involved than recruiters. We're going to run you through in-house interview gauntlets if that's what you want and need (detailed feedback included). We'll rip apart your resume and start from scratch if that's a smart thing to do. I've found 0% of the recruiters I've talked to can do those things effectively -- perhaps you're different, but we've never met. :]
3) We help you network.
4) We'll actively help you look at companies outside our recruiting contract scope. We'll recommend companies that we don't work with. This is not a "sometimes candidates get jobs at non-clients" sort of thing. This is more of a "let's put you first, no matter what" sort of thing.
I think this is the first time in a long time that I see a startup that aims to solve the hiring problem with something other than technology (with people), so my sincere congratulations.
As a CTO of a successful startup, I would sign up as an expert if you were a non-profit in a heartbeat - and I don't mean that you don't charge your clients, just a B corp or something that aims to solve this problem without getting rich. If you are successful and have a solid network that works, you will still prioritize paying clients over non-paying ones, no-matter how hard you try not to. Convince me otherwise?
Our hypothesis is, that if someone showed candidates how to prepare rigorously for interviews, how good engineers actually do things, and how to think about things the right way, then they'd avoid making several mistakes in interviews and at work.
We're taking a very hands-on detailed human approach. Because interviews are more like a date, than they are like a test.
I agree that the hiring process is broken; but when I look at this, it just comes across as ordinary recruiting with some (snaps fingers) pizazz.
How do you help the hiring companies choose the right candidates?
In my experience, the best recruiters are those who bring in ideal candidates without being pushy or overselling. Do you have some objective way of ranking candidates? Do you filter out unqualified candidates?
I think there's a spectrum when it comes to recruiting -- some recruiters are good at their job, no doubt, but the majority of people get left behind by the industry. Helping people become better versions of themselves simply isn't a value recruiting firms hold dear.
The best recruiters, as you said, take already ideal candidates and figure out how to sell them on their companies in an authentic way.
We flip the model around and start with the candidate, no matter where they're at. That's not just a "snap fingers pizzazz" - that's changing the core process.
We'll build tools internally to rank candidates and companies eventually, but right now it's goodm old-fashioned human power! (We have a couple tools already built, but nothing game changing is live)
I know this beats the very premise of your product - "personalized" guidance but thought I would ask anyway.
How open are you to sharing general guidelines (that are insightful and not already available everywhere) ?
It would also help if you could ask the people who are successfully placed to write their learnings along the process. Similar to how the Insight data engineering fellow and others at coding schools share what they learnt/built.
The "what's in it for me" question is a good one. While very unintuitive, we've had no problem signing people up who are simply helpful types. There's a large population out there of talented people who enjoy helping others and this is the most impactful, time efficient way to do it.
At first we were thinking about offering money, but the economics of the model don't really work out. No matter what we do, since we're not guaranteed money, we can't guarantee experts money. Under that situation, we could offer them on average less than $60 an hour... at which point 1) it feels like work and 2) the people who become experts usually make 3x that.
After we worked on this for months, it turned out the best system was simply a volunteer system. Strange, eh?
Are you guys willing to coach to self-taught programmers(who do not have a comp sc. degree) for the entry level jobs? Or you are focused on taking experienced candidates and groom them for more senior level position?
Absolutely willing to take self-taught programmers. In fact, in our experience thus far, we've found self-taught people tend to get better results when coached/mentored.
This is a neat idea! Btw OP looks like you're serving the Google Lato font over HTTP while your site is coming over HTTPS; I think this is causing some of the issues folks are having not being able to see the text very well.
Another question, are you guys aimed at programmers only or are you placing people who work in all aspects of software? I'm a business analyst/strategist in the tech sector but not a programmer- is that a position that you'd be able to help place?
Our goal is to eventually scale the coaching model so it's financially sensible to expand into other positions and eventually industries. The expert network is a big piece of that!
"empower all people," "help they deserve," "status quo is unacceptable," "they have had decades to find a solution to help the masses. They have failed," "facilitate this _movement_," "increase the rate of innovation across the world"...
Who do you think you are? MLK? You're a fancy-pants version of "Goodwill" that literally caters to just the 1%, get over it.
I do believe everything that is written there. If you want to take it as inflated or egotistical, go ahead -- that's your right.
If you understand the mission and what we're trying to do here though, we're really aiming to help everyone. Starting with software is simply a foothold that works when you're an early stage startup. It lets us focus the business and run the model against an industry that moves so ridiculously fast, we are forced to keep up. As we can build tech to scale coaching, we'd like to achieve price points low enough to help everyone.
That's the plan at least. Not over it! Will keep dreaming!
"We work with top companies who pay us to specially refer them the best candidates. If we think you're good enough, we'll recommend them as a company for you to check out."
This sounds like a new twist on the same old recruiter workflow. Is that an unfair judgment?
Also, what if you don't think we are good enough? Do you still offer help?
1. New twist on old recruiter workflow -- 100% correct. Making money sort of demands you fit into old models at least a little bit. Once we gain more traction, we can try out more daring things. Up until now, though, the main question was "do people want coaching?". We've found that answer. :)
2. If you're not good enough for those companies, we'll figure out why and still help you out. Granted, we won't help you for months and months -- but we're not going to leave you hanging there. We think helping everyone is going to build a strong brand and service.
Looks like a neat service. Just as a point of information, should I assume if I don't get a response that my submission has been rejected? Would be nice to get a replying if submissions are not taken into consideration just to know not to wait.
Good luck with expanding the service to other cities!
Very cool - small thing, there's a spello in the footer "We have helped place candidates at top technoogy companies and startups." Bigger thing, software jobs are pretty much all jobs, or do you mean tech jobs? Either way I like it, nice one!
Awesome! Are you willing to help someone from a classic engineering background transition to development and getting a more entry-level job? Or are your focus on already experienced developers working in the industry? Thanks!
This is excellent idea. At least how I understand it. Recruiters such badly and we have very little reason to work with them. This would provide better value proposition and make devs more motivated to work with them.
Seems you're taking the 10X approach and focusing on full-time jobs instead of freelance/per-project jobs. I like it! Too bad about the location restriction, are remote positions possible to hire for?
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
Creator here (shamefully submitted myself, haha). Happy to answer any/all questions or ramble on and on about the problem.
We basically think there needs to be a legitimately trustworthy service out there. Something that acts more like a a career coach instead of a position spammer. Something that understands your needs and specific situation.
Along the lines of "doing things that don't scale", we're completely human powered but technology assisted. There are a lot of things that are involved with career coaching or recruiting that are simply tedious -- we automate them away so we can better focus on relationships.
[+] [-] sageabilly|10 years ago|reply
Also, what's your geographical range of companies you're working with? Companies all over the US? Only SV? Only West Coast? Worldwide?
[+] [-] edw519|10 years ago|reply
Based upon what you're seeing:
1. Please rank these in order of importance:
2. What % of opportunities are in large companies vs. start-ups?3. What % of a "typical" programmer's energy should be spent presenting themselves better vs. actually getting better?
4. What makes your coaches/experts so special? Do they have last names?
Nice concept. Best wishes to you and all your candidates.
[+] [-] thisisit|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryandrake|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thirdtruck|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] empalms|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mtrn|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KZeillmann|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] asxna|10 years ago|reply
Cheers!
[+] [-] samgnesin|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coherentpony|10 years ago|reply
s7.addthis.com
stats.g.doubleclick.net
s-static.ak.facebook.com
cdn.optimizely.com
2762420311.log.optimizely.com
cdn.segment.com
[+] [-] KnightHawk3|10 years ago|reply
or am I missing something?
[+] [-] fecak|10 years ago|reply
Jobstart can help negotiate offers, for which they charge the candidate 20% of the difference between original and accepted offer.
I'm an independent agency recruiter, and it sounds a lot like what I do. I don't charge candidates for negotiating services though.
I agree that most recruiters aren't very good at what they are supposed to do. Positioning yourselves as coaches is a marketing strategy to differentiate from those recruiters, but what you are doing is basically the same thing as what a good (both skilled and 'benevolent') recruiter might do, no?
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
1) All of our coaches are experienced engineers. 2) We're much more involved than recruiters. We're going to run you through in-house interview gauntlets if that's what you want and need (detailed feedback included). We'll rip apart your resume and start from scratch if that's a smart thing to do. I've found 0% of the recruiters I've talked to can do those things effectively -- perhaps you're different, but we've never met. :] 3) We help you network. 4) We'll actively help you look at companies outside our recruiting contract scope. We'll recommend companies that we don't work with. This is not a "sometimes candidates get jobs at non-clients" sort of thing. This is more of a "let's put you first, no matter what" sort of thing.
[+] [-] dblock|10 years ago|reply
As a CTO of a successful startup, I would sign up as an expert if you were a non-profit in a heartbeat - and I don't mean that you don't charge your clients, just a B corp or something that aims to solve this problem without getting rich. If you are successful and have a solid network that works, you will still prioritize paying clients over non-paying ones, no-matter how hard you try not to. Convince me otherwise?
[+] [-] soham|10 years ago|reply
At http://InterviewKickstart.com, we're trying something similar, but from the other size viz. Candidates.
Our hypothesis is, that if someone showed candidates how to prepare rigorously for interviews, how good engineers actually do things, and how to think about things the right way, then they'd avoid making several mistakes in interviews and at work.
We're taking a very hands-on detailed human approach. Because interviews are more like a date, than they are like a test.
[+] [-] gwbas1c|10 years ago|reply
How do you help the hiring companies choose the right candidates?
In my experience, the best recruiters are those who bring in ideal candidates without being pushy or overselling. Do you have some objective way of ranking candidates? Do you filter out unqualified candidates?
(Snaps fingers) PiZZaZZZ!
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
I think there's a spectrum when it comes to recruiting -- some recruiters are good at their job, no doubt, but the majority of people get left behind by the industry. Helping people become better versions of themselves simply isn't a value recruiting firms hold dear.
The best recruiters, as you said, take already ideal candidates and figure out how to sell them on their companies in an authentic way.
We flip the model around and start with the candidate, no matter where they're at. That's not just a "snap fingers pizzazz" - that's changing the core process.
We'll build tools internally to rank candidates and companies eventually, but right now it's goodm old-fashioned human power! (We have a couple tools already built, but nothing game changing is live)
[+] [-] javadi82|10 years ago|reply
How open are you to sharing general guidelines (that are insightful and not already available everywhere) ?
It would also help if you could ask the people who are successfully placed to write their learnings along the process. Similar to how the Insight data engineering fellow and others at coding schools share what they learnt/built.
Eg: http://insightdataengineering.com/blog/mapmycab.html
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rickr|10 years ago|reply
Some UI feedback - the 'I agree/disagree' buttons on your mission component are kind of weird. I clicked on both just to see what would happen.
I think the CTA to sign up as an expert was a bit hard to find - perhaps due to the colors?
I'm also not sure why I would want to become an 'expert'. What's in it for me?
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
The "what's in it for me" question is a good one. While very unintuitive, we've had no problem signing people up who are simply helpful types. There's a large population out there of talented people who enjoy helping others and this is the most impactful, time efficient way to do it.
At first we were thinking about offering money, but the economics of the model don't really work out. No matter what we do, since we're not guaranteed money, we can't guarantee experts money. Under that situation, we could offer them on average less than $60 an hour... at which point 1) it feels like work and 2) the people who become experts usually make 3x that.
After we worked on this for months, it turned out the best system was simply a volunteer system. Strange, eh?
[+] [-] subrat_rout|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hecontreraso|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BinaryIdiot|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
Will fix. Little nervous pushing changes right now, hah.
[+] [-] soham|10 years ago|reply
Founder of http://InterviewKickstart.com here. We do something similar, but with two differences:
1. We do it from a bootcamp angle. Candidates join us for rigorous (re)training in CS fundamentals.
2. Our revenue comes from candidates and not from companies. That helps us stay on candidates' side.
Let's grab coffee some day? We're in South Bay.
[+] [-] sageabilly|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
Our goal is to eventually scale the coaching model so it's financially sensible to expand into other positions and eventually industries. The expert network is a big piece of that!
[+] [-] stellographer|10 years ago|reply
"empower all people," "help they deserve," "status quo is unacceptable," "they have had decades to find a solution to help the masses. They have failed," "facilitate this _movement_," "increase the rate of innovation across the world"...
Who do you think you are? MLK? You're a fancy-pants version of "Goodwill" that literally caters to just the 1%, get over it.
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
If you understand the mission and what we're trying to do here though, we're really aiming to help everyone. Starting with software is simply a foothold that works when you're an early stage startup. It lets us focus the business and run the model against an industry that moves so ridiculously fast, we are forced to keep up. As we can build tech to scale coaching, we'd like to achieve price points low enough to help everyone.
That's the plan at least. Not over it! Will keep dreaming!
[+] [-] codingdave|10 years ago|reply
This sounds like a new twist on the same old recruiter workflow. Is that an unfair judgment?
Also, what if you don't think we are good enough? Do you still offer help?
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
2. If you're not good enough for those companies, we'll figure out why and still help you out. Granted, we won't help you for months and months -- but we're not going to leave you hanging there. We think helping everyone is going to build a strong brand and service.
[+] [-] kartikkumar|10 years ago|reply
Good luck with expanding the service to other cities!
[+] [-] suttree|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
We can help people understand the skills for all ranges of software jobs, but prioritize people looking in tech.
[+] [-] gusmd|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] desireco42|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] omouse|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fweespeech|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] felipegalvao|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ztratar|10 years ago|reply