Breaking the Cycle: Overcoming the Corporate Delusion in Hiring Practices

I’m an ex-GM at Uber and am now building a startup in the UK, and I have one very painful question: Why is hiring for a startup in the UK so damn difficult?

Within our entrepreneurial network, we often see the repercussions of poor hiring. Dying from bad hires is faster and easier than from a bullet to the head. It’s always the same story: startups struggle to hire the best people, lower or alternate their standards, and onboard people who don’t fit. The project then starts to underperform, never meets its revenue goals, and dissatisfies investors. And that’s the end. All the while, these wrong hires just update their resumes and move on.

The real problem isn’t with these “resume-seekers” but with a lack of coherence: startups dream of growing into huge corporations and fail in hiring because they jump the gun and start hiring like one. This always happens subconsciously. The ambition to become huge fools people and leads them to make decisions that go against their will and mojo.

The Journeymen

So, why is closing any position in tech, finance, or operations such a challenge, especially when you are a well-funded, fast-growing, ambitious project that offers above-average salaries and an outstanding team?

My answer is precisely because you are a well-funded, fast-growing, ambitious project. The truth is, a lot of the people we interview are not really interested in disrupting an entire country’s economy, building a unicorn, or changing the lives of thousands of people. Instead, they are building their resumes, which is a completely separate task that has nothing in common with the future unicorn’s goals.

It’s worth noting that the UK’s work culture is currently shifting, in part due to Revolut. We’ve observed that people who have worked at Revolut are much more results-oriented than the average population. The numerous startups founded by Revolut alumni are only accelerating this trend.

To sort this out, I came up with a pretty elaborate system of green and red flags that worked well for my interviews. But then I delved into my past at Uber and saw that it worked in a pretty similar way. The same toolset for a startup and a huge corporation—that’s weird. It was only then that I saw the real pattern behind all of this.

Red flags

Let me explain this concept using the “green” and “red” flags I’ve mentioned.

For example, there are a number of things that trigger me during an audition.

A huge number of people say that exposure to founders is important to them. But this is something that happens automatically when you come up with and deliver cool projects. The most important quality to master for this is to get shit done, and that’s what we should actually be discussing.

Another trigger is when people worry about what their job title will be. This is fine, but it doesn’t align with what any startup aims to do: revolutionise an industry! What’s really important are the scope of your role and the opportunity to make an impact at scale, and obviously, the opportunity to earn good money when the company achieves its objectives. Think of the early role in the next Revolut as your last job you applied for with a CV.

An obvious trigger, but one that needs to be mentioned, is when the first thing a person asks, during an evening interview, “Do you always work this late?” In general, any questions about work-life balance are a trigger if they are discussed before responsibilities and tasks. It should be clear to everyone that working at a startup isn’t a 9-to-5 job, but it’s not an investment bank either.

I’m also triggered by memorised, rehearsed speeches. You want a bit of spontaneity and confidence. It’s very appealing when you communicate as equals.

Green flags

The main green flag is when a person independently, and without help, builds their own vision on top of what’s written in the job description and understands the bigger goal the startup is pursuing. You think, “Wow, we didn’t even tell you that.”

There is a percentage of candidates who, during the call, start saying “we” instead of “you” and quickly become part of the team. This happens unconsciously, but we are convinced every time that it’s a very good sign. These people quickly integrate into the team, get involved in tasks, and start working toward the common goal.

You also have to pay attention to how a person presents a case: what arguments they make and how grounded they are in reality. This shows how they will take initiative and complete tasks.

The ability to maintain a well-reasoned, intellectual conversation on a topic and think broadly in the area for which they will be responsible.

Pre-screening

During screening, we look for signs of excellence. We like to find rising stars early on and look for signs that they are amazing. Maybe they were first in their class at a good university. A fast career track at well-known companies, like the Big 3 or an audit firm, also works. You can grow fast there, but you have to be very talented. Unusual projects that a person took on with great responsibility are also a good sign.

Sports achievements can also be a good sign that a person is driven to be the best and is ready to invest a lot.

On the other hand, red flags are an obscure university, unclear career paths after that, and frequent job changes. I don’t want to be the first one to check whether this person is exceptional and test if the previous track record is just a mistake. We are not rejecting them; we are simply deprioritising them and thus lowering their chances of getting a job with us.

Hire them as your number-two employee

All of these rules aren’t about the fact that hiring in every startup must necessarily be done in accordance with them. They are about a startup’s need for a sense of homogeneity throughout its life.