Leaning into your competitive advantage
A community member posed a question on Slack this week about how to write a thoughtful rejection letter to a candidate.
They are on a hiring spree and will likely be interviewing (and rejecting) lots of candidates. As per usual, several other members offered their perspective on the issue, and I think they ultimately got to a great draft based on what they shared.
One interesting sub-topic that emerged in the thread was around whether to offer feedback to the candidate on why they didn't get the role.
I've been in interviews with larger companies where I didn't even get a rejection letter - I filled out the application, uploaded my cover letter and resume, got an automated email confirming receipt, and then...
Crickets. No follow-ups afterward.
If you're an early stage startup looking for talent - you probably can't match FAANG on compensation or work-life balance.
So instead of competing on axes where you're sure to lose, compete on ones where you have structural advantage.
Nail the candidate experience. Make it more personable. Make candidates feel appreciated and respected.
Here are some ideas:
Record a Loom to augment the job description
Have the hiring manager conduct the screening call
Check in throughout the process to get the candidate's feedback
Invite the candidate out to a team lunch
Ask your lead investor to pitch the role to the candidate (if you really like them)
Provide feedback for rejected candidates
Yes, it's a lot more work, but this is how you can differentiate yourself when you can't pay FAANG salaries.
Large companies can't do this, because there's a process and policy to be followed, HR / legal advice to heed, they're not as desperate for talent, etc., etc.
As Paul Graham famously wrote, do things that don't scale. I just re-read the article (such a classic!) and here are a couple quotes that I really enjoyed and found relevant on this topic:
On not following what big companies do:
Garry Tan pointed out an interesting trap founders fall into in the beginning. They want so much to seem big that they imitate even the flaws of big companies, like indifference to individual users [job applicants]. This seems to them more "professional." Actually it's better to embrace the fact that you're small and use whatever advantages that brings.
On putting in an extraordinary effort:
It's not enough just to do something extraordinary initially. You have to make an extraordinary effort initially. Any strategy that omits the effort — whether it's expecting a big launch to get you users, or a big partner — is ipso facto suspect.
--
p.s. I try to follow my own advice here in growing Ops Hacks, too. This community is not VC-backed like On Deck. So I don't need to grow the community quickly, which means I can take my time in onboarding each new member in a 1:1 call, take cold DMs on LinkedIn from prospective members, etc.