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.
-
Show this thread
-
Doesn’t get you all the signals you’d want but if you care about e.g. clarity of thought it’s quite signalful and, unlike their written output, less likely to be indefinitely siloed or materially the work of other people.
1 reply 3 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
Easier to get signal on “Can this person usefully pitch X to e.g. a candidate?” by listening to them attempt to do that rather than by hoping a reference check remembers that particular facet of reality really clearly and doesn’t confuse it with “So did you like them?”
2 replies 3 retweets 28 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @patio11
“Clarity of thought” and “how you articulate it” are related but to the extend that you can form an opinion of a person?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @utsengar
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.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
(Since written text occasionally fails to capture nuance please read implicit <bemused but skeptical></> tags around “perhaps you are hiring for a job which never requires talking with people.”)
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.