The Scope Creep Is Real: Why You're Still Hiring After 9 Interviews
You define the problem. You draft a role. You post the listing. Then you start interviewing. And that's when it happens. Before you know it, you're not hiring for the role you posted. You're hiring for something new. Something… bigger. Something fuzzier. You're chasing the ghost of an ever-expanding unicorn.
Read ArticleWhy Traditional Resumes Fail and How STAR Format Hiring Solves It
Tired of resume guesswork? Discover how STAR-format profiles give hiring teams real context and results—no keyword filters required.
Read ArticleWhy Most Job Descriptions Fail (and What to Do Instead)
You've seen them a thousand times: 'We're looking for a rockstar self-starter with 5+ years of experience in a fast-paced environment…' It's generic. It's recycled. It says everything and nothing all at once. And worst of all—it's repelling the candidates you actually want to hire.
Read ArticleThe Candidate You Need Is Already in Your Inbox. You're Just Not Allowed to See Them
They applied. They were qualified. They had done the work before. But they didn't use the right buzzwords. Or their title was off by one word. Or your AI filter couldn't parse their resume layout. So… they got ghosted by your system. Not because they weren't good. Because they weren't formatted for the machine.
Read ArticleAI Resume Screening Isn't AI Hiring (And That's Why It's Failing)
If you ask most hiring teams whether they use AI, the answer is yes. But dig deeper, and you'll find their AI is just automating outdated processes. That's not smarter hiring. That's just faster filtering. Hiring isn't broken because it's too slow at filtering. Hiring is broken because it's filtering for the wrong things.
Read ArticleWhat Is Outcome-Based Hiring? (And Why It's Replacing Resumes)
Most companies still hire by filtering resumes, checking for keywords, and hoping the formatting tells a story. But there's a better way. Outcome-based hiring flips the process: Instead of asking 'What titles has this person held?' You ask 'What problems have they solved?'
Read Article⏳ The Hidden Costs of Slow Hiring (And How AI Speeds It Up)
You might think slow hiring means careful hiring. More steps = better choices, right? Not exactly. In reality, slow hiring costs you your best candidates, your team's morale, your business goals, and eventually, your brand reputation.
Read Article💥 Unshitifying Hiring, Part 5: We Don't Need More Data. We Need Better Decisions.
If you've been involved in hiring recently, you know this feeling: You're staring at a spreadsheet full of resumes, with LinkedIn open in one tab, an ATS in another, and a never-ending Slack thread. There's no shortage of data—there's a shortage of clarity.
Read Article📉 The Resume Problem Nobody Wants to Admit
You're hiring for a critical role. You open your ATS. You filter for keywords. You eliminate 90% of applicants in under 10 seconds. Efficient, right? Except the person who actually solved your exact problem last year? They used different terminology. And your system filtered them out.
Read Article🎯 The Job Hunt Is Broken—And Even LinkedIn Knows It
4 months. That's the new average time it takes to land a job, according to LinkedIn's own data. Not four weeks. Not a few conversations. Four. Months. That's not a market problem. That's a system failure.
Read ArticleUnshitifying Hiring, Part 4: Ghosting, Gatekeeping & the Grind
Let's call it what it is—modern hiring is a trust crisis. Candidates ghost companies. Companies ghost candidates. Everyone's burned out. Everyone's lying just a little. And the whole process feels like a never-ending performance review you didn't sign up for.
Read ArticleHow to Reduce Time-to-Hire Using AI Automation
If you're still hiring the old-fashioned way, you're probably losing your best candidates. In 2025, the talent market moves fast—especially in tech, sales, and product roles. Candidates expect speed. Delays = drop-offs. The companies that win top talent? They've automated their hiring workflows from day one.
Read Article