If you’re doing background due diligence on a founder, investor, executive, etc etc, there are far less effective widely used tactics than going to a podcast search engine and listening to them talk for an hour or two.
-
-
Also think it’s likely to be far less distorted than e.g. asking them the same set of questions in a job interview. “We’re curious how you’d perform in our open, collaborative work environment, so I thought I’d test with hostile questioning by a bored person you won’t work with”
Show this thread -
“And maybe you’ll be well-poised and affable during that conversation so I will give your simulated teammate the explicit instruction to undermine you and or lie to you. To see what happens, you know. Might not hire based on your reaction, naturally.”
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
“Clarity of thought” and “how you articulate it” are related but to the extend that you can form an opinion of a person?
-
It’s a signal, right? Maybe you’re hiring for a job which never requires talking to people or a candidate has replete evidence of thoughtfulness, in case weight lowly. But often you’re at the “totally guessing” stage, in which case this is a lot better.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.