How do you actually know a candidate can do the job - before you hire them?
Resumes tell you where someone has been.
References tell you what their manager was willing to say out loud.
Interviews tell you how well someone prepares for interviews.
But none of those things reliably tell you whether the person can actually perform in the role on day one.
We thought about this - especially for roles where the gap between "interview performance" and "job performance" tends to be widest: customer-facing roles, high-pressure environments, anything that requires quick judgment under uncertainty.
A few things I'm curious about from this community:
Do you use any form of practical assessment or simulation before making an offer? If so, what does that look like?
Where do you draw the line between "thorough vetting" and "asking too much of candidates"?
Has anyone found a reliable signal that actually predicts real-world performance, rather than just interview performance?
Would love to hear what's actually working (and what's flopped) — especially in high-volume hiring where you can't run 5 rounds for every candidate.
