Skip to content

Writing

  • in hiring
  • 5 min read

Context Matters

Hiring is often viewed as a universal process -- "hire the best engineers, obviously!" -- but the reality is far more nuanced.

Hiring is deeply context-dependent, and understanding this can make the difference between building a thriving team and struggling with misaligned talent. As someone who has worked extensively in hiring and team building, I've observed firsthand how crucial it is to align your hiring strategy with your company's current stage, technical needs, and overall vision. This blog post discusses three distinct scenarios I've recently encountered while consulting for different clients, each facing unique hiring challenges.

Through these examples, we'll explore:

  1. How a solo founder can build their founding team
  2. The approach an early-stage startup should take when scaling their engineering team
  3. Why a Series A startup needed to shift focus from engineering to operations

Each case study offers insights into the critical thinking required to design effective hiring processes that go beyond simply filling roles. We'll discuss how to identify the truly important traits for each context, how to redesign job descriptions to attract the right candidates, and how to create interview processes that effectively evaluate the skills and attributes that matter most.

By the end of this post, you'll have a deeper understanding of why one-size-fits-all hiring rarely works, and how to approach hiring strategically based on your company's specific context and needs.

Client 1: A solo founder hiring their founding team

I am working with a product-minded solo founder with a ML background who is looking to hire their founding team. Since they don't have a software engineering background, designing the right hiring process was a crucial problem to solve.

We started by identifying the critical first hire - an engineer who could help drive the technical vision of the company. The job description they had in place had a ton of technical jargon and was focused on the wrong things. The critical insight here was while being pre-pmf, the first couple of engineers need to have spikes in one of the following two areas:

  1. Highly Creative: They need to be someone who can explore the product space and come up with innovative solutions.
  2. Strong Execution: They need to be someone who can take a vague idea and turn it into a product really quickly.

As you are trying to find your PMF, you need to be able to iterate quickly and try out a bunch of different things. This means you need to hire for speed and creativity, not for scale and robustness.

Once we aligned on this, we redesigned the job description to focus on these two areas and started sourcing candidates from our network. We also started working on a technical interview process that would help us identify these traits in candidates using techniques from my previous posts on hiring.

Client 2: An early stage startup looking to scale

This client is an early stage startup with about 10 engineers looking to scale to 20-30 engineers in the next 6 months. They have a couple of products showing early signs of traction and are looking to build out their engineering team. The current team is very product-focused and has a strong engineering culture. They are looking to hire engineers who can come in and start contributing to the product quickly and autonomously. The kind of profiles they are looking for are similar to the Forward Deployed Engineer role at Palantir.

This was obviously an area I have a lot of experience in. The key value add here was helping them design a hiring process that would help them identify engineers who could come in and start contributing quickly. This was done by first shadowing the current interviews and identifying the key areas where they were struggling to evaluate candidates - this could be questions they were asking, or the way they were synthesising the signal from the interviews. I then gave the interviewers feedback on what's working well, and areas where they could improve. I even conducted a few interviews myself to help them calibrate their bar.

Even when you know what you are looking for, it is not always easy to evaluate it in an interview. This is where having an experienced interviewer can make a big difference. During the interview, it is important to be ruthlessly objective about the signal you are getting. This means you form a hypothesis about the candidate, and then try to disprove it with your next question.

Client 3: A series A startup looking to expand their operational team

This was a very different problem to solve. The core technical and operational strategy of the company relied more on the operational team than the engineering team. Despite this their focus was on hiring engineers, and they were struggling to find the right profiles, and to keep them engaged once they joined.

The key insight here was that the operational team was the bottleneck in the company's growth, and they needed to hire for that team first. Once we aligned on this, we started working on a hiring process for the operational team. We also worked on hiring a few key engineers who could help the operational team scale - this had a much wider impact than hiring engineers directly.

It is important to be true to your company's needs and not get caught up in the hype around hiring engineers. Sometimes the most impactful hires are not in the areas you initially think. Having those honest conversations with the founders can make a big difference in the hiring strategy.

Conclusion

Through these engagements I learned a lot about how context matters in hiring. Here are a few key takeaways:

  1. Align with Your Stage: Whether you're pre-PMF, showing early traction, or entering a growth phase, your hiring needs will vary dramatically. Prioritize the skills and attributes that will drive your company forward at its current stage.
  2. Look Beyond Technical Skills: While technical proficiency is important, factors like creativity, execution speed, and cultural fit can be equally, if not more, crucial, especially in early-stage companies.
  3. Adapt Your Process: Your hiring process should reflect your company's needs and culture. Whether it's designing creative technical interviews, focusing on operational skills, or prioritizing autonomous contributors, tailor your approach to find the right fit.
  4. Understand Your Bottlenecks: Sometimes, the most impactful hires aren't in the areas you initially think. Be open to reassessing your needs and focusing on the roles that will truly drive your company's growth.
  5. Continuously Refine: As your company evolves, so too should your hiring strategy. Regularly reassess and adjust your approach to ensure you're attracting and selecting the talent that aligns with your current and future needs.

Effective hiring is not just about filling roles; it's about building a team that can execute on your vision and drive your company forward. By understanding the nuances of your company's context – its stage, culture, and strategic goals – you can design a hiring process that not only attracts top talent but also ensures that talent is the right fit for your specific needs.

Remember, the goal isn't to hire the "best" people in absolute terms, but to hire the right people for your context. This mindset shift can make all the difference in building a team that's truly equipped to tackle your unique challenges and opportunities.

  • in hiring
  • 2 min read

Interviews are Unfair

And that's ok.

As I have mentioned before, genuinely connecting with the candidate makes you an effective interviewer. Having high empathy for the candidate helps build that genuine connection. However, that makes it easy to fall into the "fairness trap".

Fairness Trap

"Fairness trap" is where you, the interviewer, hold yourself to a high standard of fairness. You want to do right by the candidate. It is natural - you have just spent a solid amount of time going through their background, and other interviewers' feedback, and then spent an hour or so interviewing them yourself - it makes sense that you feel a connection. But this connection can cloud your judgment, especially when evaluating candidates who are good, but not great.

Hiring is Existential

For early-stage companies, hiring is existential. Each new team member can significantly impact the company's trajectory. While you might have predetermined criteria for ideal candidates, meeting these baseline requirements isn't always enough.

When evaluating a candidate, consider:

  • What new capabilities will this hire bring to the team?
  • How much potential for growth does the candidate have?
  • What is their "ceiling" - the maximum impact they could have on the company?

These questions help you look beyond surface-level qualifications and consider the candidate's long-term value to your organization.

While data and criteria are important, don't underestimate the value of your intuition. Trust your gut feeling about a candidate, but be aware of your own biases.

Empathy and Objectivity

The key to effective interviewing lies in balancing empathy with objectivity:

  1. During the interview: Build a genuine connection with the candidate. Show empathy and create a comfortable environment for open discussion.
  2. After the interview: Step back and evaluate objectively. Consider the candidate's fit, potential, and possible growth trajectories within your company.

Conclusion

Interviews are inherently unfair because they can never capture a person's full potential or fit within a short interaction. However, by acknowledging this limitation and consciously balancing empathy with objectivity, we can make more informed hiring decisions.

Remember, the goal isn't just to be fair to the candidate in the moment, but to make the best decision for your company's future. Sometimes, that means passing on a good candidate in hopes of finding a great one.

  • in career
  • 3 min read

Stochastic Growth Trajectory: Good or Bad?

We often have preconceived notions about the meaning of career growth. Typically, it's assumed to mean climbing the corporate ladder, moving into higher positions, and often transitioning into management. However, this linear path isn't the only way to grow professionally. My personal journey led me to experience a different approach: the stochastic growth trajectory.

Increasingly Confused

Throughout my career I have been nothing if not confused. In fact, the confusion has gone up over time. The last time I was confident of anything was when I was 13 years old - when I was convinced I wanted to do Physics. It was towards the end of grad school when I started considering leaving academia. But at that point I didn't know if anyone would hire me, and in what role. And I was really surprised to get hired by Palantir. This unexpected turn would shape my understanding of career growth in ways I couldn't have anticipated.

Palantir's approach to Growth

I spent 7 years at Palantir, and I can confidently say that I would not have stayed for that long if Palantir did not have the healthy approach to growth that it has. I got to explore a lot of different things in a relatively short timeframe. But there was more to it than just accelerated growth.

At Palantir it is expected that you own your growth. You are expected to be self-aware, critical, and intentional about how you grow. This is not an easy thing to do, especially early in your career. But it is what allows for people to grow into positions where they can have an outsized impact. It is also what keeps employees engaged and driven.

For me personally, this meant I was able to be an SRE, a Tech Lead, a backend developer, a product manager, a sales engineer, a data scientist, a data engineer, and a people manager during my 7 years at Palantir. This is what allowed me to go from managing a team of 20-25 people to being an IC dev on a backend team because I wanted to invest in my technical skills. Even when I moved from management to an IC role, I was still growing.

Flip Side

There is however a flip side to this.

Firstly, the responsibility of figuring out what growth means is completely on you. You have to figure out not just what growth means, but also how to grow in those areas. This can be quite hard. I was fortunate to have found the right leads, mentors and peers to help me.

Secondly, the micro-decisions you might make while trying to figure out what to work on next might not necessarily lead you to your macro-goals. To be honest, even today I am still figuring out what my macro-goals are. And the increasing awareness of not-knowing what I want to do gives me pause in figuring out what project to take on next.

Conclusion

I don't really have a conclusion for this post. I don't know if a stochastic growth trajectory is good or bad. Looking back I found the that "own your growth" worked for me, maybe. But it is not for everyone, and I don't even know if it worked for me or not.

Perhaps one way to think about it is to not worry much about macro-goals, especially if you don't have clarity about what they are. Instead focus on learning and growing in the near-term, and having faith that whatever you end up working on, there is a high chance that you will learn something new, and grow.

If you are curious, genuine, and keen to learn, you will land on your feet.

Hiring Theses

Hiring exceptional candidates is hard. In previous posts I have written about how one might go about identifying and interviewing strong candidates consistently.

In this post I would like to share a technique at the final stage of the hiring process that I have seen used at Palantir and Protocol Labs, and have found to be quite effective - namely, the hiring thesis.

What is a Hiring Thesis?

A hiring thesis is a comprehensive document prepared by the hiring manager after making a decision to hire a candidate. It serves as a summary of why they chose this particular individual, highlighting their strengths and qualities that make them an ideal fit for the company.

This is not just a list of their strengths and weaknesses but a nuanced and thoughtful document.

Key components of a good Hiring Thesis

  • What projects or workstreams will this candidate have an outsized impact on? And what specific qualities will make that happen?
  • What is this candidate's ceiling? Is that an acceptable level and why?
  • What is this candidate's kryptonite? What projects/people should this candidate absolutely not work on/with?
  • What is the best case scenario?
  • What is the worst case scenario? How might we mitigate this?
  • Any advice for managers about what to look out for to help this person succeed?

Why is a Hiring Thesis important?

It might seem like a lot of overhead to write this document for every hire, however, it is a useful exercise for multiple reasons.

  • It increases confidence in the hiring decision by forcing you to consider multiple different scenarios
  • It provides as a guide for their manager for things to watch out for, staffing decisions etc.
  • It builds up a knowledge asset for the company and helps calibrate future interviewers/hiring managers.
  • Parts of the hiring thesis could also be used as a sell chat for the candidate!

Conclusion

The hiring thesis is a powerful tool that can significantly enhance your hiring process and set new team members up for success. By taking the time to articulate your thoughts and expectations for each new hire, you create a valuable resource that benefits not just the individual, but the entire organization.

Implementing a hiring thesis process may require some initial effort, but the long-term benefits far outweigh the investment. It promotes more thoughtful decision-making, provides a roadmap for employee development, and contributes to a culture of intentional growth within your company.

Ultimately, the hiring thesis is more than just a document—it's a commitment to nurturing talent and fostering an environment where both individuals and the company can thrive. By adopting this approach, you're not just filling positions; you're strategically building the future of your organization, one carefully considered hire at a time.

Get in touch by emailing me@anjor.xyz if you are an early stage startup looking to improve your hiring process.

How did Palantir hire so well?

I have written before about the Forward Deployed Engineer profile, and how hiring for that profile can be highly impactful for a company -- Palantir being a great example. In that blog post I also wrote a bit about how to hire FDEs. But honestly, re-reading that post I realised that the framework I wrote down though helpful to orient, does not give the means to assess whether or not your hiring is going well.

One Hiring Manager

That got me thinking -- how did Palantir do it so well? What was the secret? Unfortunately, the answer is not an easy one. Palantir did things that do not scale for their hiring. During the time I interviewed there, there was 1 hiring manager for all engineering hires. This one individual was responsible for:

  • Gathering feedback from all the on-site interviews a candidate has been through: 3 per candidate.
  • Based on the synthesised feedback, design a bespoke hiring manager interview for the candidate that would gather signal that was missed during the on-site interviews.
  • After the interview, if decided to hire the candidate, write a thorough hiring thesis for the candidate.

These were just the actual interviewing responsibilities. This same hiring manager was also the lead for the whole recruiting machinery:

  • Working with recruiters to put together top of the funnel strategy.
  • Working with leadership and resourcing to understand headcount and/or specific geographical/profile needs.
  • Designing and running the internship program.
  • And most importantly recruit and calibrate new interviewers.

Conclusion

By centralising the hiring function there was immense quality control over the hiring. But as you can imagine, it is hard work and can result in the individual burning out.

Like any other aspect of building a startup, this is a tradeoff. At early stage companies I do recommend founders and/or founding team to be involved in hiring as much as possible. You know your company and its culture better than anyone else. As you scale, if you can find an individual who is willing to take on the hiring function and keep it centralised as much as possible that is ideal for maintaining high quality bar.

Need Help with Your Hiring Strategy?

If you're looking to improve your company's hiring process, I can help. I offer:

  • Tailored hiring strategy development
  • Interviewer training and calibration
  • Guidance on building a hiring function

Whether you're a startup founder or an HR leader in a growing company, let's discuss how to elevate your hiring to the next level. Contact me for a free consultation.

  • in hiring
  • 2 min read

Debugging, Interviewing and Complex Systems

Debugging

Debugging is in its essence diagnosing the behaviours of a complex system. One needs to probe and observe the system to understand why it's doing something it's not supposed to do. Debugging using the scientific approach usually works quite well:

  1. Reason about collected data
  2. Form a hypothesis.
  3. Probe the system to test the hypothesis - this could be in the form of providing a certain input, collecting more data, or altering the underlying infrastructure.
  4. If hypothesis is disproved - repeat 1 & 2.

Interviewing

Interviewing is not that different from debugging in that sense. Your goal is to understand a fairly complex system, to develop a sense of how the system would perform in different situations. Approaching an interview with the same scientific approach can be an effective strategy.

  1. You start with some initial data - this would be the resume, or notes from other interviewers.
  2. Form a hypothesis.
  3. Ask a question that tests the hypothesis.
  4. Go back to 1 and repeat until you are satisfied with your understanding of the system.

For example, if you see a lot of academic projects on the resume, you may form the hypothesis that this is an individual who is academically inclined and might not end up prioritising the customer's needs. You could test that by asking questions like

  • How do you go about prioritising your work?
  • What was the most important aspect of a project that you worked on?
  • Have you ever considered doing a PhD, why/why not?

The answers will prove/disprove your hypothesis, but will also provide you with more information to form new hypotheses.

Conclusion

A lot of engineers do not like interviewing. I find that a bit strange because as engineers we reason about complex systems on a daily basis. Interviewing is not that different. Taking a scientific approach to interviewing is not only effective, but will hopefully help you enjoy the process of interviewing - in turn making you a better interviewer.

  • in hiring
  • 3 min read

Motivational Interview

Why have a motivational interview?

Often times companies will do a "culture fit" interview. This is usually done to understand whether the things that motivate the candidate are aligned with the company values and culture. It is also to see whether they joining the team will have a non-linear effect on the wider team - in addition to their individual performance, do they have a positive effect on the people around them.

However, you often run risk of hiring similar profiles and as a result losing out on a lot of candidates. It is important to be mindful about why you are conducting this interview.

Everyone has a few things that drive them, keep them engaged in their work. The question you are trying to answer is not whether the person is motivated, but what is it that motivates the person and why? Is that something we can give them?

Different types of motivations

Broadly you can classify motivations in two categories: intrinsic and extrinsic.

Intrinsic motivations are based on the individual. These can be both positive and negative.

  • Do they care about learning?
  • Do they care about making their environment better?
  • Are they achievement driven?
  • Are they an adrenaline junkie who thrive in stressful situations?

Then there are extrinsic motivations.

  • Promotion and career advancement
  • Do they expect external fairness, and do something thinking that it's fair?
  • Being part of a group
  • Fear

Notice that neither intrinsic nor extrinsic motivations are necessarily good or bad. It is also important to understand that good motivation does not equate with a good person. Don't hire someone because they are nice and friendly, but hire them because their motivation translates into them being productive.

What to ask?

There are different ways to approach this. A lot of them end up in open ended how questions.

  • How did they decide to change jobs?
  • How did they choose which companies to interview at?
  • If they had multiple offers at some point, how did they choose which one to pick?

You can also get them to open up by asking them to talk about something they are passionate about.

  • Tell me about the last time you heard an interesting problem and were really invested in solving it.
  • Tell me about a passion project of yours. And then ask follow up questions.
  • What was your proudest achievement? What achievement of yours do you think went unnoticed?

Honestly, it is just about being genuinely curious and getting to know them as a person.

Conclusion

Conducting a motivational interview is not just about identifying whether a candidate fits into the existing culture of the company. Instead, it's about understanding the underlying drivers that keep them engaged and productive in their work. If you manage to understand that at a deep level that can guide your hiring as well as staffing decisions.

Remember that a motivational interview should be approached with genuine curiosity. Investigating a candidate's motivations through thoughtful, open-ended questions can reveal insights that go far beyond their resume. This approach ensures that you are not only bringing in capable individuals but also those whose motivations align with and enhance the team’s dynamic.

Is a PhD worth it?

Personally, it was worth it for me. I was fortunate to work with amazing people like Bill Dorland, Alex Schekochihin and many more. And I got to work on fun problems.

But, if you are asking this question, it probably isn't worth it for you. You should only do a PhD if you are so hell bent on doing one that no one could convince you otherwise. There were many who tried to tell me it was a bad idea to do a PhD, but I was not to be convinced.

Don't get me wrong, a PhD can absolutely be worth it. You get to work on something that you (hopefully) love. You get to push the boundaries of human knowledge. It is literally one of the most impactful things to do.

It also grows you as a person - you become better at learning new things, at systematically breaking down a problem and chipping at it till it becomes manageable. You learn to communicate your work to a wider audience. You develop a confidence in yourself that you can take on gnarly, seemingly impossible problems and just figure it out.

However, a PhD is a long and painful journey. It can be quite lonely. So if you have even the smallest of doubts about whether you should do one or not, then don't. Especially if you think it might be a stepping stone in a career outside academia. More than likely it is one, but that is not motivation enough to actually stick with it during.

Having said that I really enjoyed mine, so if you are that focused on it then go for it! It's also not a one way street. People do go back to doing a PhD after a career in industry - my good friend satej is a great example! After a successful career at Palantir he decided to spend some time in academia, and seems to be enjoying it.

If you are someone who is trying to decide between a PhD and a career in the industry, hope this short writeup helped. If you have any questions or want to discuss further, do get in touch - I am happy to chat.

Taking bets on candidates

Hiring for early stage companies is hard. You are competing for strong talent against a ton of other companies. As a founder or a hiring manager, your ability to identify candidates to take a bet on can be an asset.

I was a bet candidate

I was a bet hire at Palantir. I didn't have a standard background - since the age of 13 I had always wanted to study Physics and no one could have convinced me otherwise. Because of this I didn't even consider studying anything else. I learnt programming to simulate physics systems, and to analyse and visualise the simulation data. I did not work on side projects or build things for fun. I had done no internships. I had zero experience in tech before joining Palantir.

I still remember my interviews. I could tell that I didn't know enough, but I could also tell that I enjoyed engaging with the questions I was being asked, and I think my genuine interest and engagement with the problems came through.

I was lucky that the hiring manager could see my potential and decided to take a bet on me. Or maybe it had nothing to do with luck, and this was just a reflection of the high-trust high-autonomy culture at Palantir.

Relate to the candidate

Going back to the essentials from the FDE hiring post - those qualities have nothing to do with the tactical specifics of what the candidate knows, and everything to do with who they are as a person. During the interview, you need to relate to the candidate, get to know them as a person and only then you may find out what makes them tick. What are their spikes and what are their kryptonites.

If they are engaged and demonstrate first-principles understanding of the problem, they are probably going to be successful. On the other hand, if they are not engaged and keep trying to reverse-guess what you want to hear from them, maybe not.

An example of a good interview

There is this one interview I shadowed at Palantir that has stuck with me as a master-class in interviewing. The candidate was super passive and giving monosyllabic answers. It was really hard to break through. The interviewer kept asking different questions about their background persistently, trying to get to a topic they would enjoy talking about. Eventually, the interviewer succeeded - the candidate opened up when talking about their interest in foreign films and how that relates to them learning new languages.

It was an absolutely incredible interview. It took a lot of effort but the interviewer finally did manage to relate to the candidate, and understood a bit more about how they could be successful.

Don't shy away from going off-road

The key takeaway is to get to know the candidate. They are a person. They are going to have things that engage them, and things they struggle with. Guide the interview to a place where you find common ground to help the candidate open up. Don't worry about the tactical specifics of what you want to hear from them. Take copious notes or use a tool like Metaview1 and you can always synthesise later.

To conclude

Taking bets on candidates can be a powerful strategy for early-stage companies looking to build exceptional teams. By focusing on a candidate's potential, engagement, and personal qualities rather than just their technical skills or traditional qualifications, you can uncover hidden gems that others might overlook. Remember, the goal is to identify individuals who can grow with your company and contribute meaningfully to its success. As you interview, be willing to go off-script, relate to the candidate on a personal level, and look for signs of genuine interest and problem-solving ability. These "bet candidates" often bring fresh perspectives and a strong drive to succeed, potentially becoming some of your most valuable team members.

Get in touch if you would like to discuss this topic further, or if you think I could help with your hiring process.

  1. I know a cofounder of Metaview personally, but this post was not sponsored by them in any way. Nor do I know if they agree with the thoughts in this post. I genuinely think it's a great product! ↩

Invoice Generator built using OpenDevin

Now that I am trying to run my own business as an independent consultant, I have these overheads such as needing to generate invoices and send them to clients.

To start with I copied some template off the internet and put it in my google drive as a spreadsheet. For the last 2 months I have been manually editing this spreadsheet, downloading it as a pdf, and emailing it to my client. This is not efficient at all.

I looked for a lightweight tool to generate these pdfs, but didn't really find one. So I thought I would build one myself. Well, I say myself. In reality, this was a great opportunity to experiment with OpenDevin.

initial prompt

I started off with a simple initial prompt, and I was impressed with the results. Granted, the first version of the pdf looked a bit drab but it was a great starting point for me to build on.

But I decided to be lazy and test how much I could push OpenDevin to do my work for me, and to my absolute delight OpenDevin built a cli that was able to generate a pdf that I could use.

second prompt

I then also got it to add a readme and a license. This whole exercise took me 10 minutes!

All code along with the 2 generated invoices is available on github. Do give it a spin!