Finding Great Candidates

Goal: Identify candidates we'd be thrilled to have on the team. Not "can do the job" — candidates we're excited about.

"Our first 100 people are our cultural co-founders."

What Makes Someone Great (Universal Traits)

These traits apply to EVERY role. A candidate missing any of these is unlikely to be great.

1. High Agency

What it is: Takes initiative. Makes things happen. Doesn't wait for permission or perfect conditions.

How to spot it:

• Started something from nothing (project, company, community, initiative)
• Identified problems and solved them without being asked
• Phrases like "I noticed X wasn't working, so I..." or "I proposed..."
• Built things with limited resources
• Career moves that show they created opportunity vs. waited for it

Red flags:

• Passive language ("I was assigned to...", "My manager asked me to...")
• No examples of self-initiated work
• Lots of "we" with no clear individual contribution
• Job history of only joining established teams/processes

2. Grit & Resilience

What it is: Perseveres through hard things. Doesn't quit when it gets difficult.

How to spot it:

• Shipped something hard (long timeline, technical challenges, organizational friction)
• Stayed with a problem until solved vs. moving on when stuck
• Built something despite obstacles (funding, team, technical, market)
• Career shows persistence (didn't job-hop at first sign of difficulty)
• Specific stories of overcoming setbacks

Red flags:

• Lots of short stints without clear upward moves
• Vague explanations for leaving ("it wasn't a good fit")
• No examples of pushing through difficulty
• Blame-shifting to circumstances

3. Evidence of Impact

What it is: Demonstrable results. Outcomes, not just activities.

How to spot it:

• Metrics at ANY scale: "10x'd revenue", "reduced costs 60%", "shipped to 5M users"
• Promotions and increasing scope over time (trajectory)
• Concrete examples: "built X which did Y"
• Results even in resource-constrained environments
• Would their bosses rate them 8+ and hire them again?

Red flags:

• Vague: "worked on", "contributed to", "helped with"
• No metrics even for senior roles
• Flat trajectory (same level/scope over years)
• Titles without corresponding impact stories

4. Technical Depth

What it is: Everyone should code, build, or have deep technical understanding.

How to spot it:

• GitHub/portfolio with real projects
• Technical blog posts or writing
• Can explain complex systems simply
• Specific technical choices and tradeoffs mentioned
• For non-eng: deep understanding of how things work, technical curiosity

Red flags:

• Avoids technical detail
• Can't explain their technical work
• No evidence of building things
• Relies entirely on others for technical decisions

5. AI-Native

What it is: Uses AI tools daily, understands implications, sees opportunities.

How to spot it:

• Mentions specific tools: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Copilot
• Built something with AI or integrated AI into workflow
• Understands AI capabilities and limitations
• Excited about AI, not fearful
• Uses AI to accelerate their own work

Red flags:

• No mention of AI tools
• Seems unaware of AI capabilities
• Treats AI as novelty vs. fundamental shift
• Behind the curve on modern tools

6. Communication Excellence

What it is: Writes clearly, explains complex ideas simply, collaborates well.

How to spot it (their APPLICATION is a sample!):

• Clear, structured writing
• Gets to the point
• Explains technical concepts accessibly
• Good questions in interviews
• Public writing/speaking if available

Red flags:

• Rambling or unclear application
• Can't articulate their own work
• Jargon-heavy without substance
• Poor writing quality

7. World-Class at Something

What it is: Top 1% in at least one domain. Demonstrable excellence.

How to spot it:

• Recognized expertise: patents, publications, talks, awards
• Deep mastery evident in how they discuss their domain
• Built something impressive in their area
• Others seek them out for this expertise
• "The person you call" for X

Red flags:

• Average across the board
• No area of clear strength
• Jack of all trades, master of none
• Can't point to what they're best at

8. Interesting Person

What it is: Curious, diverse interests, unique perspective. Someone you'd want at dinner.

How to spot it:

• Unusual background or path
• Hobbies/interests outside work
• Asks interesting questions
• Learns continuously
• Brings different perspective to problems

Red flags:

• One-dimensional
• No interests outside work
• Generic responses
• Nothing memorable about them

Role-Specific Traits

Beyond universal traits, each role has specific requirements:

Engineering Roles (Full-Stack, Software, AI Lead)

• Shipped production code at scale
• System design thinking
• Code quality/testing discipline
• Open source contributions (bonus)
• Technical leadership/mentorship (for senior)

AI Application Engineer

• Deep in AI research community
• Translates research → shipped features
• Built AI evaluation/experimentation systems
• Rapid prototyping ability
• Stays current with latest developments

Community Manager

• Always-on presence and reliability
• Crisis management experience
• Multi-channel management (Discord, Telegram, X)
• Clear, accurate communication under pressure
• Domain community experience (web3, developer, B2B, etc.)

Program / Event Manager

• Public-facing comfort and energy
• Operational excellence
• Event/program management at scale
• Builds playbooks and systems
• AI-powered automation of workflows

Technical Account Manager

• Technical depth + customer empathy
• Problem-solving under pressure
• Clear communication of technical concepts
• Project management discipline
• Relationship building

The Screening Process

Step 1: Run the Screen

If you have a screening tool (e.g., a Greenhouse integration script):

cd [YOUR_SCREENING_TOOL_PATH] && npm run screen -- --days-back 1 --min-score 70

Common variations:

# Last 7 days, specific role
npm run screen -- --days-back 7 --job-id [JOB_ID]

# Higher bar (80+), tag in Greenhouse
npm run screen -- --min-score 80 --tag-greenhouse

# All options
npm run screen -- --days-back 7 --min-score 75 --tag-greenhouse --send-slack

If you don't have a screening tool, pull candidates from Greenhouse manually or via the Greenhouse API and feed them to Claude for evaluation using the framework below.

Step 2: Read the Output

cat [YOUR_SCREENING_TOOL_PATH]/output/daily-digest-$(date +%Y-%m-%d).md

Step 3: Deep Dive on Top Candidates

For anyone scoring 75+, provide deeper analysis with links always included:

## [Name] — [Score]/100

**Links**: [Greenhouse](https://app4.greenhouse.io/people/[CANDIDATE_ID]/applications/[APP_ID]/redesign) | [LinkedIn](URL or "Not provided")

### Universal Traits Assessment

| Trait         | Signal   | Evidence                        |
| ------------- | -------- | ------------------------------- |
| High Agency   | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |
| Grit          | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |
| Impact        | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |
| Technical     | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |
| AI-Native     | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |
| Communication | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |
| World-Class   | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |
| Interesting   | ✅/⚠️/🚩 | [specific quote or observation] |

### Role-Specific Fit

[Assessment against role requirements]

### Why We'd Be Thrilled

- [Specific exceptional signals]

### Questions to Probe

- [Specific areas needing verification]

### Verdict

[Must Interview / Worth Exploring / Pass]

Step 4: Summary Table with Links

Always conclude with a summary table including clickable links:

## Summary

| Candidate | Score   | Verdict   | Greenhouse  | LinkedIn              |
| --------- | ------- | --------- | ----------- | --------------------- |
| [Name]    | [Score] | [Verdict] | [View](URL) | [Profile](URL) or N/A |

Job IDs

Add your Greenhouse job IDs here to filter screening by role:

The Bar

"90% confidence that this person can do a job only 10% of candidates could do."

We're not asking "can they do the job?" We're asking "would we be thrilled to work with them every day?"

• Must Interview: Multiple strong signals across traits, world-class at something, high skill AND will
• Worth Exploring: Promising but questions remain — needs interview to resolve
• Pass: Missing must-haves, too many red flags, or just "fine"

When in doubt, pass. Better to miss someone good than hire someone mediocre.