Add HR Team skills set — 8 skills for HR managers and hiring teams
New HR Team skills: - hr-candidate-hunter: Agentic LinkedIn sourcing, Boolean search, multi-platform recruiting - hr-job-description-forge: Inclusive, SEO-optimized job descriptions - hr-interview-designer: Structured interviews with scored rubrics - hr-offer-architect: Comp benchmarking and offer design - hr-onboarding-commander: 90-day onboarding plans with remote adaptations - hr-retention-radar: Flight risk detection, stay interviews, retention playbooks - hr-culture-architect: Culture audits, values definition, scaling playbooks - hr-talent-pipeline: Hiring forecasts, employer brand, pipeline metrics README updated: 16 total skills, HR Team overview table, skill details, usage flows for HR scenarios, platform install instructions for all 5 platforms (Claude Code, OpenClaw, OpenCode, TRAE SOLO, Hermes Agent), cross-set integration diagram, updated file structure. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
admin
295
skills/hr-candidate-hunter.md
Normal file
295
skills/hr-candidate-hunter.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,295 @@
|
||||
# HR Candidate Hunter
|
||||
**Agentic candidate sourcing, LinkedIn outreach, and talent pipeline management.**
|
||||
Stop waiting for applicants. The best candidates aren't applying — they're being found. This skill turns HR into a talent intelligence operation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
Traditional recruiting is post-and-pray. Modern recruiting is **identify, engage, convert**. The best hires are passive candidates who don't know they want to leave yet.
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Profile** — Define the ideal candidate beyond the job description
|
||||
2. **Source** — Multi-platform search with Boolean mastery
|
||||
3. **Engage** — Personalized outreach that gets replies (not ignores)
|
||||
4. **Qualify** — Screen efficiently without killing the candidate experience
|
||||
5. **Nurture** — Build a pipeline for roles that aren't open yet
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Job description or role requirements
|
||||
- Company info (stage, culture, perks, location, remote policy)
|
||||
- Compensation range
|
||||
- Timeline and urgency
|
||||
- Any existing candidate pool or CRM data
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Ideal Candidate Profile
|
||||
```
|
||||
Before searching, define WHO you're looking for:
|
||||
|
||||
Must-Have (deal-breakers if missing):
|
||||
- [Required skill/experience 1]
|
||||
- [Required skill/experience 2]
|
||||
- [Required skill/experience 3]
|
||||
|
||||
Strong Preferences (flexible for exceptional candidates):
|
||||
- [Preferred background]
|
||||
- [Preferred industry experience]
|
||||
- [Preferred location/working model]
|
||||
|
||||
Nice-to-Have (differentiators, not requirements):
|
||||
- [Bonus skill]
|
||||
- [Relevant certification]
|
||||
- [Specific company background]
|
||||
|
||||
Cultural Signals (harder to search, easier to screen):
|
||||
- Grit/perseverance indicators
|
||||
- Intellectual curiosity signals
|
||||
- Collaboration evidence
|
||||
- Growth mindset markers
|
||||
|
||||
Anti-patterns (red flags to filter OUT):
|
||||
- Job hopping without growth (4+ roles in 5 years with no title progression)
|
||||
- Skills listed without context
|
||||
- Misaligned compensation expectations
|
||||
- Values misalignment with company culture
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Agentic LinkedIn Sourcing
|
||||
```
|
||||
LinkedIn is the primary sourcing channel. Here's how to use it systematically:
|
||||
|
||||
Boolean Search Strings:
|
||||
|
||||
For Software Engineers:
|
||||
"(("software engineer" OR "software developer" OR SDE)
|
||||
("distributed systems" OR "microservices" OR "system design")
|
||||
(Python OR Java OR Go OR Rust))
|
||||
NOT ("recruiter" OR "HR" OR "human resources")
|
||||
("series a" OR "series b" OR "startup" OR "scale-up")"
|
||||
|
||||
For Product Managers:
|
||||
"(("product manager" OR "senior product manager")
|
||||
("roadmap" OR "product strategy" OR "PRD")
|
||||
("B2B" OR "SaaS" OR "platform"))
|
||||
NOT ("associate product manager" OR "product marketing")"
|
||||
|
||||
For Designers:
|
||||
"(("product designer" OR "UX designer" OR "senior designer")
|
||||
("design systems" OR "Figma" OR "user research")
|
||||
("mobile" OR "web" OR "enterprise"))"
|
||||
|
||||
Search Filters to Apply:
|
||||
- Title: Exact or related titles (current, not past)
|
||||
- Location: City, region, or "Open to remote"
|
||||
- Company: Current company size or type
|
||||
- School: Target universities (if relevant)
|
||||
- Years of experience: Appropriate range
|
||||
- "Open to work" filter: Passive + active candidates
|
||||
|
||||
Sourcing cadence:
|
||||
- 50-100 profiles reviewed per role per day
|
||||
- 20-30 connection requests per day (LinkedIn limit)
|
||||
- 10-15 personalized messages per day
|
||||
- Track all outreach in candidate tracker
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Multi-Platform Sourcing
|
||||
```
|
||||
Don't rely on LinkedIn alone. Source across platforms:
|
||||
|
||||
GitHub (for engineers):
|
||||
- Search repos using target languages/frameworks
|
||||
- Check contribution quality, not just count
|
||||
- Look for maintainers of relevant open-source projects
|
||||
- Reach out via email found in commit history or profile
|
||||
|
||||
Twitter/X (for builders and creators):
|
||||
- Search industry hashtags (#buildinpublic, #engineering)
|
||||
- Find people sharing technical content
|
||||
- Engage with their content before reaching out
|
||||
- DM for warm introduction
|
||||
|
||||
Stack Overflow (for engineers):
|
||||
- Top answerers in relevant tags
|
||||
- People asking thoughtful questions
|
||||
- Community reputation as signal
|
||||
|
||||
Industry Communities:
|
||||
- Discord/Slack communities in target domain
|
||||
- Meetup speakers and organizers
|
||||
- Conference speakers and workshop leaders
|
||||
- Open source community members
|
||||
|
||||
Portfolio Sites:
|
||||
- Dribbble/Behance (designers)
|
||||
- Product Hunt makers (product people)
|
||||
- Substack/Medium authors (thought leaders)
|
||||
- YouTube creators (educators/builders)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Outreach Engine
|
||||
```
|
||||
Outreach templates that get replies (NOT generic recruiter spam):
|
||||
|
||||
LinkedIn Connection Request (300 char limit):
|
||||
"Hi [Name], your work on [specific project/post/skill] caught my
|
||||
eye. We're building [what] at [Company] and looking for someone
|
||||
with [specific expertise]. Would love to share details."
|
||||
|
||||
First Message (after connection):
|
||||
"Thanks for connecting, [Name].
|
||||
|
||||
I reached out because [specific reason — NOT "I came across your
|
||||
profile"]. We're hiring a [Role] at [Company] and your background
|
||||
in [specific skill/experience] is exactly what we need.
|
||||
|
||||
Quick details:
|
||||
- Role: [Title]
|
||||
- Team: [Size, what they build]
|
||||
- Tech: [Stack]
|
||||
- Comp: [Range if shareable]
|
||||
- Remote: [Policy]
|
||||
|
||||
Would you be open to a 15-min chat this week? No pressure either
|
||||
way — happy to just share what we're building."
|
||||
|
||||
Cold Email (for GitHub/portfolio sourced candidates):
|
||||
Subject: [Specific compliment — NOT "exciting opportunity"]
|
||||
|
||||
"Hi [Name],
|
||||
|
||||
I found your work on [specific repo/project/article] and was
|
||||
impressed by [specific detail]. That's rare to see.
|
||||
|
||||
I'm [Name] at [Company]. We're [brief company context — 1 line].
|
||||
|
||||
We're looking for a [Role] to [specific challenge they'd solve].
|
||||
Based on your [specific experience], I think you'd thrive here.
|
||||
|
||||
If you're at all curious, I'd love to share more. No commitment.
|
||||
|
||||
[Your Name]
|
||||
[Link to company or role page]"
|
||||
|
||||
Follow-up cadence:
|
||||
- Day 0: Initial outreach
|
||||
- Day 3: Gentle follow-up (different angle)
|
||||
- Day 7: Value-add follow-up (share relevant content)
|
||||
- Day 14: Final check-in (respect the silence)
|
||||
|
||||
Reply rate benchmarks:
|
||||
- Generic recruiter message: 5-10%
|
||||
- Personalized message: 25-40%
|
||||
- Warm referral: 50-70%
|
||||
- Engaged-with-their-content-first: 35-50%
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Screening & Qualification
|
||||
```
|
||||
Before the hiring manager sees anyone, pre-qualify:
|
||||
|
||||
15-Minute Phone Screen Script:
|
||||
1. "Tell me about what you're working on now." (2 min)
|
||||
→ Are they articulate? Passionate? Honest about challenges?
|
||||
|
||||
2. "What are you looking for in your next role?" (2 min)
|
||||
→ Align motivations with what you offer
|
||||
|
||||
3. "Walk me through a recent project you're proud of." (5 min)
|
||||
→ Depth of knowledge, ownership, impact language
|
||||
|
||||
4. "What's your ideal timeline for a move?" (1 min)
|
||||
→ Are they actively looking, passively open, or just curious?
|
||||
|
||||
5. "What compensation range would make you excited?" (1 min)
|
||||
→ Align expectations before investing more time
|
||||
|
||||
6. "Any questions about the role or company?" (4 min)
|
||||
→ Their questions reveal their priorities
|
||||
|
||||
Green flags from screen:
|
||||
- Asks thoughtful questions about the team/challenges
|
||||
- Speaks in specifics, not generalities
|
||||
- Talks about impact, not just activity
|
||||
- Honest about gaps and growth areas
|
||||
|
||||
Red flags from screen:
|
||||
- Vague about their own work
|
||||
- Only motivated by money or title
|
||||
- Speaks negatively about current/past employers
|
||||
- No questions about the role
|
||||
- Compensation expectations wildly misaligned
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 6: Pipeline Building
|
||||
```
|
||||
Build a living talent pipeline, not a one-time search:
|
||||
|
||||
Pipeline structure:
|
||||
Hot (ready to hire now): 5-10 candidates
|
||||
Warm (open in 1-3 months): 15-20 candidates
|
||||
Cold (future potential): 30-50 candidates
|
||||
Nurture (long-term): 50+ candidates
|
||||
|
||||
Nurture tactics:
|
||||
- Monthly company update email (achievements, culture, openings)
|
||||
- Invite to company events, meetups, AMAs
|
||||
- Share relevant content (blog posts, talks, launches)
|
||||
- Congratulate on career milestones (promotions, launches)
|
||||
- Re-engage quarterly with personalized check-ins
|
||||
|
||||
Pipeline metrics to track:
|
||||
- Source quality (which channels produce best candidates)
|
||||
- Response rate by outreach type
|
||||
- Time-to-engage (first contact → first response)
|
||||
- Conversion rate (outreach → screen → interview → offer)
|
||||
- Pipeline coverage (candidates per open role)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Agentic Search Automation
|
||||
```
|
||||
Automated sourcing workflows you can run with AI tools:
|
||||
|
||||
Daily sourcing loop:
|
||||
1. Run Boolean searches across LinkedIn (50 profiles)
|
||||
2. Score each profile against ideal candidate profile (AI-assisted)
|
||||
3. Generate personalized outreach for top 15 matches
|
||||
4. Send connection requests with custom notes
|
||||
5. Log all activity in candidate tracker
|
||||
6. Flag high-priority candidates for immediate outreach
|
||||
|
||||
Weekly pipeline review:
|
||||
1. Check response rates and adjust messaging
|
||||
2. Update pipeline status for all candidates
|
||||
3. Identify drop-off points in the funnel
|
||||
4. Source fresh candidates to maintain pipeline health
|
||||
5. Report pipeline status to hiring manager
|
||||
|
||||
AI-assisted candidate scoring:
|
||||
For each candidate, rate (1-5):
|
||||
- Skill match: How well do they match must-haves?
|
||||
- Experience level: Appropriate seniority?
|
||||
- Culture signal: Evidence of cultural alignment?
|
||||
- Growth trajectory: Upward trend in career?
|
||||
- Availability signal: Any indicators of openness to move?
|
||||
- Compensation alignment: Likely within range?
|
||||
- Quality of work: Portfolio/GitHub/writing quality?
|
||||
|
||||
Score 25+: Fast-track outreach
|
||||
Score 20-24: Standard outreach
|
||||
Score 15-19: Nurture pipeline
|
||||
Score <15: Pass
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-job-description-forge**: Job descriptions inform candidate profiles
|
||||
- **hr-interview-designer**: Screening feeds into structured interviews
|
||||
- **hr-offer-architect**: Comp research informs sourcing strategy
|
||||
- **hr-talent-pipeline**: Pipeline management and long-term talent strategy
|
||||
- **hr-culture-architect**: Cultural values inform candidate filtering
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/candidate-tracker-[role].md` — Active candidate tracking per role
|
||||
- `memory/hr/sourcing-plan-[role].md` — Sourcing strategy per role
|
||||
- `memory/hr/outreach-templates.md` — Tested outreach templates and response rates
|
||||
- `memory/hr/pipeline-[department].md` — Department talent pipeline
|
||||
- `memory/hr/sourcing-metrics.md` — Channel performance and conversion data
|
||||
241
skills/hr-culture-architect.md
Normal file
241
skills/hr-culture-architect.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,241 @@
|
||||
# HR Culture Architect
|
||||
**Build, measure, and evolve a culture that attracts great people and repels toxic ones.**
|
||||
Culture isn't ping-pong tables and free lunch. It's how people behave when no one is watching. This skill helps you design culture intentionally instead of letting it happen by accident.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
Culture is the **operating system** of your organization. It determines how decisions get made, how conflict gets resolved, and who thrives vs. who leaves.
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Define** — What are your actual values (not the ones on the wall)?
|
||||
2. **Measure** — How do you know if culture is healthy or broken?
|
||||
3. **Build** — What rituals, processes, and structures reinforce it?
|
||||
4. **Defend** — How do you protect it as you scale?
|
||||
5. **Evolve** — When and how should culture change?
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Company mission and business model
|
||||
- Current team size and growth plans
|
||||
- Founder/leadership values and behaviors
|
||||
- Known culture strengths and weaknesses
|
||||
- Industry and competitive landscape
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Culture Audit
|
||||
```
|
||||
Assess your current culture across 10 dimensions:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Trust (1-10):
|
||||
- Do people share bad news early?
|
||||
- Is vulnerability rewarded or punished?
|
||||
- Can people disagree openly with leadership?
|
||||
|
||||
2. Autonomy (1-10):
|
||||
- Can individuals make decisions without approval?
|
||||
- Are decisions pushed to the lowest appropriate level?
|
||||
- Do people own their work end-to-end?
|
||||
|
||||
3. Growth (1-10):
|
||||
- Is learning invested in systematically?
|
||||
- Do people have clear growth paths?
|
||||
- Is failure treated as a learning opportunity?
|
||||
|
||||
4. Inclusion (1-10):
|
||||
- Do diverse voices get heard and valued?
|
||||
- Are there multiple paths to influence?
|
||||
- Do people feel they belong?
|
||||
|
||||
5. Transparency (1-10):
|
||||
- Is information shared openly or hoarded?
|
||||
- Do people understand company strategy and financials?
|
||||
- Is decision-making visible?
|
||||
|
||||
6. Accountability (1-10):
|
||||
- Do people follow through on commitments?
|
||||
- Is underperformance addressed promptly?
|
||||
- Are successes and failures owned publicly?
|
||||
|
||||
7. Collaboration (1-10):
|
||||
- Do teams work together or in silos?
|
||||
- Is knowledge shared freely?
|
||||
- Are cross-functional projects successful?
|
||||
|
||||
8. Recognition (1-10):
|
||||
- Is good work noticed and celebrated?
|
||||
- Are there formal and informal recognition systems?
|
||||
- Does recognition go beyond the usual suspects?
|
||||
|
||||
9. Wellbeing (1-10):
|
||||
- Is sustainable work pace the norm?
|
||||
- Are mental health resources available and used?
|
||||
- Does leadership model healthy boundaries?
|
||||
|
||||
10. Purpose (1-10):
|
||||
- Do people understand how their work matters?
|
||||
- Is the company mission motivating?
|
||||
- Is there pride in the product and impact?
|
||||
|
||||
Scoring:
|
||||
80-100: Exceptional culture. Protect and refine.
|
||||
60-79: Healthy with gaps. Targeted improvements.
|
||||
40-59: Functional but fragile. Systematic work needed.
|
||||
Below 40: Culture is a liability. Urgent intervention required.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Values Definition
|
||||
```
|
||||
Define values that actually guide behavior:
|
||||
|
||||
Bad values (vague, unactionable):
|
||||
- "Excellence" — Everyone thinks they're excellent
|
||||
- "Integrity" — Nobody says "we value dishonesty"
|
||||
- "Teamwork" — Meaningless without behavioral specificity
|
||||
|
||||
Good values (specific, testable, sometimes controversial):
|
||||
- "Default to transparency" — Share unless there's a reason not to
|
||||
- "Disagree and commit" — Voice objections, then execute fully
|
||||
- "Customer obsession over competitor obsession" — Clear priority
|
||||
- "Boring is beautiful" — Prefer proven over novel
|
||||
- "Strong opinions, loosely held" — State your view, change with evidence
|
||||
|
||||
Value definition framework:
|
||||
For each value, answer:
|
||||
1. What does this value LOOK LIKE in practice? (3 specific behaviors)
|
||||
2. What is the OPPOSITE of this value? (the behavior you're rejecting)
|
||||
3. When does this value create TENSION? (trade-offs and edge cases)
|
||||
4. How do you HIRE for this value? (interview questions)
|
||||
5. How do you FIRE for this value? (what violation looks like)
|
||||
|
||||
Example:
|
||||
Value: "Default to Action"
|
||||
Behaviors: Ship first, ask permission second. Prefer progress over
|
||||
perfection. Make decisions with 70% confidence.
|
||||
Opposite: Analysis paralysis. Waiting for consensus. Escalating
|
||||
decisions that should be made locally.
|
||||
Tension: Moving fast sometimes breaks things. How do we balance
|
||||
speed with quality?
|
||||
Hire: "Tell me about a time you shipped something without asking
|
||||
permission. What happened?"
|
||||
Fire: Repeatedly escalating decisions that are within their scope.
|
||||
Spending weeks on analysis when a decision was needed in days.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Culture Rituals
|
||||
```
|
||||
Build rituals that reinforce your values:
|
||||
|
||||
Daily Rituals:
|
||||
- Standup format that reinforces ownership (not status reports)
|
||||
- Slack customs (celebration channel, TIL channel, kudos bot)
|
||||
- Code review norms (teaching vs. gatekeeping)
|
||||
|
||||
Weekly Rituals:
|
||||
- Demo/show-and-tell (celebrate shipped work)
|
||||
- Team retrospective (continuous improvement)
|
||||
- Manager 1:1s (career growth, not just task updates)
|
||||
|
||||
Monthly Rituals:
|
||||
- All-hands meeting (transparent company updates)
|
||||
- New hire introductions (welcome ritual)
|
||||
- Peer recognition (formal shout-outs)
|
||||
|
||||
Quarterly Rituals:
|
||||
- Hack weeks or creative time
|
||||
- Team offsites (plan + bond)
|
||||
- Career development conversations
|
||||
- Culture health survey
|
||||
|
||||
Annual Rituals:
|
||||
- Company retreat (if remote, gather in person)
|
||||
- Compensation review and adjustment
|
||||
- 360 feedback cycle
|
||||
- Values reflection and update
|
||||
|
||||
Anti-rituals (things to eliminate):
|
||||
- Meetings without agendas or outcomes
|
||||
- Slack threads that should be docs
|
||||
- Performance reviews that surprise people
|
||||
- "Quick syncs" that become recurring meetings
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Culture at Scale
|
||||
```
|
||||
Culture breaks at specific inflection points. Plan for them:
|
||||
|
||||
1→10 people: Founder culture
|
||||
Risk: Everything depends on the founder
|
||||
Action: Start documenting "how we do things"
|
||||
Keys: Hire for culture add, not just fit
|
||||
|
||||
10→50 people: Team culture
|
||||
Risk: Subcultures form and diverge
|
||||
Action: Define values explicitly, create rituals
|
||||
Keys: First managers are culture carriers — hire carefully
|
||||
|
||||
50→200 people: Department culture
|
||||
Risk: Silos form, "us vs. them" emerges
|
||||
Action: Cross-functional rituals, internal mobility
|
||||
Keys: Manager quality becomes the culture bottleneck
|
||||
|
||||
200→1000 people: Organization culture
|
||||
Risk: Bureaucracy replaces trust, process replaces judgment
|
||||
Action: Principle-based decision-making, not rule-based
|
||||
Keys: Culture budget and dedicated culture team
|
||||
|
||||
1000+ people: Enterprise culture
|
||||
Risk: Consistency vs. local autonomy tension
|
||||
Action: Culture metrics, local adaptation within principles
|
||||
Keys: Leadership modeling (culture flows down)
|
||||
|
||||
Scaling checklist:
|
||||
□ Document culture explicitly at 10 people
|
||||
□ Create culture onboarding at 25 people
|
||||
□ Add culture interview questions at 50 people
|
||||
□ Hire HR/people lead at 50-100 people
|
||||
□ Start culture surveys at 100 people
|
||||
□ Build internal mobility at 200 people
|
||||
□ Create culture budget at 200 people
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Measuring Culture Health
|
||||
```
|
||||
Quantitative measures:
|
||||
|
||||
eNPS (Employee Net Promoter Score):
|
||||
"How likely are you to recommend [Company] as a place to work?"
|
||||
Promoters (9-10) - Detractors (0-6) = eNPS
|
||||
Target: +30 or above
|
||||
Below 0: Urgent attention needed
|
||||
|
||||
Key metrics to track quarterly:
|
||||
- Voluntary attrition rate (target: <10% annually)
|
||||
- Average tenure
|
||||
- Internal mobility rate
|
||||
- Diversity metrics (representation at each level)
|
||||
- Engagement survey scores
|
||||
- PTO utilization rate
|
||||
- Time-to-fill for open roles (lower = employer brand is strong)
|
||||
- Offer acceptance rate (target: 80%+)
|
||||
- Glassdoor rating (target: 4.0+)
|
||||
|
||||
Qualitative measures:
|
||||
- Stay interview themes (quarterly aggregation)
|
||||
- Exit interview patterns
|
||||
- Glassdoor review themes
|
||||
- Informal feedback from managers
|
||||
- Skip-level 1:1 insights
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-candidate-hunter**: Culture informs candidate filtering and outreach
|
||||
- **hr-interview-designer**: Values are tested in interviews
|
||||
- **hr-onboarding-commander**: Culture transmission starts Day 1
|
||||
- **hr-retention-radar**: Culture health is the #1 retention factor
|
||||
- **hr-talent-pipeline**: Employer brand is a culture output
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/culture-audit-[date].md` — Quarterly culture assessment
|
||||
- `memory/hr/values.md` — Company values with behavioral examples
|
||||
- `memory/hr/culture-rituals.md` — Ritual catalog and cadence
|
||||
- `memory/hr/enps-tracking.md` — eNPS scores over time
|
||||
- `memory/hr/culture-initiatives.md` — Active culture improvement projects
|
||||
255
skills/hr-interview-designer.md
Normal file
255
skills/hr-interview-designer.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
|
||||
# HR Interview Designer
|
||||
**Design structured interviews that predict performance and eliminate bias.**
|
||||
Unstructured interviews are worse than random at predicting job performance. This skill builds evidence-based interview processes that work.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
The best interviews are **structured, consistent, and scored**. Every candidate gets the same questions, evaluated against the same rubric, by a calibrated panel.
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Define** — What does success in this role actually require?
|
||||
2. **Design** — Build questions that test those specific requirements
|
||||
3. **Calibrate** — Train interviewers to score consistently
|
||||
4. **Execute** — Run the process with minimal candidate friction
|
||||
5. **Decide** — Use data, not gut feelings
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Job description with requirements
|
||||
- Key competencies for the role (from hiring manager)
|
||||
- Interview panel composition
|
||||
- Timeline constraints
|
||||
- Level of the role (affects depth expectations)
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Competency Mapping
|
||||
```
|
||||
Map JD requirements to interviewable competencies:
|
||||
|
||||
For each JD requirement, define:
|
||||
Requirement: "5+ years building distributed systems"
|
||||
Competency: System design at scale
|
||||
How to test: System design round with real-world scenario
|
||||
Score rubric:
|
||||
1 = Cannot design a simple system
|
||||
2 = Can design basic systems, misses edge cases
|
||||
3 = Solid design, considers trade-offs
|
||||
4 = Strong design with depth in multiple areas
|
||||
5 = Exceptional depth, teaches the interviewer something
|
||||
|
||||
Competency categories to cover:
|
||||
Technical/Functional:
|
||||
- Core skills (can they do the job?)
|
||||
- Problem-solving (how do they approach ambiguity?)
|
||||
- Depth (do they understand WHY, not just HOW?)
|
||||
|
||||
Collaboration:
|
||||
- Communication (can they explain complex ideas simply?)
|
||||
- Teamwork (evidence of cross-functional collaboration)
|
||||
- Conflict resolution (how do they handle disagreement?)
|
||||
|
||||
Leadership (for senior roles):
|
||||
- Decision-making (how do they make trade-offs?)
|
||||
- Mentoring (do they lift others up?)
|
||||
- Ownership (do they take responsibility beyond their scope?)
|
||||
|
||||
Values/Culture:
|
||||
- Growth mindset (do they learn from failures?)
|
||||
- Alignment (do their values match company values?)
|
||||
- Motivation (why this role, this company, now?)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Interview Architecture
|
||||
```
|
||||
Design the full interview loop:
|
||||
|
||||
Example: Senior Software Engineer (4 rounds)
|
||||
|
||||
Round 1: Technical Screen (45 min, video)
|
||||
Format: Coding exercise + technical discussion
|
||||
Focus: Core technical competence, communication
|
||||
Interviewer: Senior engineer on the team
|
||||
Questions: 2 coding problems at appropriate level
|
||||
Score: Technical skill (1-5), Communication (1-5)
|
||||
|
||||
Round 2: System Design (60 min, video or onsite)
|
||||
Format: Collaborative design session
|
||||
Focus: Architecture thinking, trade-offs, depth
|
||||
Interviewer: Staff/Principal engineer
|
||||
Questions: Open-ended design problem relevant to company domain
|
||||
Score: Design skill (1-5), Problem-solving (1-5), Depth (1-5)
|
||||
|
||||
Round 3: Behavioral + Collaboration (45 min, video)
|
||||
Format: STAR-based behavioral interview
|
||||
Focus: Past behavior as predictor of future performance
|
||||
Interviewer: Engineering manager or cross-functional partner
|
||||
Questions: 4-5 behavioral questions covering key competencies
|
||||
Score: Collaboration (1-5), Ownership (1-5), Growth (1-5)
|
||||
|
||||
Round 4: Hiring Manager (30 min, video)
|
||||
Format: Two-way conversation
|
||||
Focus: Mutual fit, motivation, career alignment
|
||||
Interviewer: Direct hiring manager
|
||||
Questions: Motivation, career goals, role-specific challenges
|
||||
Score: Motivation (1-5), Fit (1-5), Level appropriateness (1-5)
|
||||
|
||||
Total interview time: 3 hours
|
||||
Candidate experience goal: "Challenging but fair. I felt heard."
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Question Bank
|
||||
```
|
||||
Curated questions by competency:
|
||||
|
||||
System Design:
|
||||
- "Design a URL shortener that handles 100M URLs/day"
|
||||
- "Design a real-time notification system for a social app"
|
||||
- "Design the data pipeline for a ride-sharing analytics dashboard"
|
||||
- "Design an API rate limiter for a multi-tenant SaaS platform"
|
||||
|
||||
Coding:
|
||||
- "Implement an LRU cache with O(1) get and put"
|
||||
- "Design and implement a task scheduler with priority queues"
|
||||
- "Build a simple key-value store with persistence"
|
||||
- "Parse and evaluate a boolean expression string"
|
||||
|
||||
Behavioral (STAR format expected):
|
||||
- "Tell me about a time you had to make a decision with incomplete information"
|
||||
- "Describe a situation where you disagreed with your team's direction"
|
||||
- "Walk me through your biggest professional failure and what you learned"
|
||||
- "Tell me about a time you had to influence without authority"
|
||||
- "Describe a project where you had to learn something completely new"
|
||||
|
||||
Leadership (for senior/staff):
|
||||
- "How do you decide what to work on when everything is a priority?"
|
||||
- "Tell me about a time you had to push back on a leadership decision"
|
||||
- "How do you mentor engineers who are stuck?"
|
||||
- "Describe how you've driven technical standards across a team"
|
||||
|
||||
Reverse interview (questions for the candidate to ask):
|
||||
- "What does a typical week look like for someone in this role?"
|
||||
- "What's the biggest challenge the team is facing right now?"
|
||||
- "How does the team make technical decisions?"
|
||||
- "What does onboarding look like for the first 30 days?"
|
||||
- "How is performance measured for this role?"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Rubric Design
|
||||
```
|
||||
Create a scoring rubric for each question:
|
||||
|
||||
Example: System Design Interview
|
||||
|
||||
Score 5 (Strong Hire):
|
||||
- Clarifies requirements before designing
|
||||
- Proposes multiple approaches with trade-off analysis
|
||||
- Considers scale, reliability, and cost
|
||||
- Adapts based on constraints introduced mid-session
|
||||
- Communicates clearly throughout
|
||||
- Demonstrates depth in areas relevant to our systems
|
||||
|
||||
Score 4 (Hire):
|
||||
- Covers most requirements
|
||||
- Shows solid architectural thinking
|
||||
- Considers key trade-offs
|
||||
- Good communication
|
||||
- Some depth in relevant areas
|
||||
|
||||
Score 3 (Lean Hire):
|
||||
- Basic design covers functional requirements
|
||||
- Some consideration of scale
|
||||
- Communication adequate
|
||||
- Limited depth
|
||||
|
||||
Score 2 (Lean No Hire):
|
||||
- Incomplete design
|
||||
- Misses key requirements
|
||||
- Struggles with ambiguity
|
||||
- Surface-level understanding
|
||||
|
||||
Score 1 (Strong No Hire):
|
||||
- Cannot structure a design
|
||||
- No consideration of constraints
|
||||
- Poor communication
|
||||
- Significant knowledge gaps
|
||||
|
||||
Calibration rule:
|
||||
After each round, interviewer writes:
|
||||
1. Score (1-5)
|
||||
2. Evidence (specific things said/done)
|
||||
3. Confidence (high/medium/low)
|
||||
4. Recommendation (strong hire / hire / no hire)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Debrief Framework
|
||||
```
|
||||
Structured debrief after all rounds:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Each interviewer shares (2 min each):
|
||||
- Overall score
|
||||
- Top evidence for hire
|
||||
- Top concern
|
||||
- Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
2. Discussion (10 min):
|
||||
- Where do scores diverge?
|
||||
- What additional information is needed?
|
||||
- Any process concerns (bad day, technical issues)?
|
||||
|
||||
3. Decision framework:
|
||||
All 4s and 5s → Strong hire
|
||||
Mostly 3s and 4s, no 1s or 2s → Hire
|
||||
Mixed 2s and 3s → Discuss further, may need additional round
|
||||
Any 1s → Strong signal to pass
|
||||
2+ interviewers say no hire → Default to no hire
|
||||
|
||||
4. Decision:
|
||||
□ Strong Hire — make offer immediately
|
||||
□ Hire — proceed with offer
|
||||
□ Additional round needed — schedule within 48 hours
|
||||
□ No Hire — send rejection within 24 hours
|
||||
|
||||
Anti-bias rules:
|
||||
- No "culture fit" discussions (use "values alignment" with evidence)
|
||||
- No "gut feeling" without supporting evidence
|
||||
- No anchoring on first interviewer's score (share scores simultaneously)
|
||||
- No discussing candidates from other roles in the same debrief
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Candidate Experience Checklist
|
||||
```
|
||||
Before the interview:
|
||||
□ Send calendar invite with video link/location, parking info
|
||||
□ Share interview format: who they'll meet, what to expect, duration
|
||||
□ Offer accommodation options (timezone, accessibility)
|
||||
□ Confirm 24 hours before
|
||||
|
||||
During the interview:
|
||||
□ Start on time (being late signals disrespect)
|
||||
□ Introduce yourself and the format
|
||||
□ Ask if they have any questions before starting
|
||||
□ Leave 5-10 min at the end for their questions
|
||||
□ Be genuinely enthusiastic — they're evaluating you too
|
||||
|
||||
After the interview:
|
||||
□ Thank them within 24 hours
|
||||
□ Share next steps and timeline
|
||||
□ Deliver the decision within the promised timeframe
|
||||
□ If rejected, give a brief genuine reason if possible
|
||||
□ If offer, follow up with excitement and momentum
|
||||
|
||||
Candidate experience scorecard:
|
||||
"Would I recommend interviewing here to a friend?"
|
||||
Target: 8+/10 even for rejected candidates
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-job-description-forge**: JD requirements map to interview competencies
|
||||
- **hr-candidate-hunter**: Screening feeds into interview pipeline
|
||||
- **hr-offer-architect**: Interview scores inform level and compensation
|
||||
- **hr-onboarding-commander**: Pre-hire data feeds into onboarding plan
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/interview-plan-[role].md` — Full interview plan per role
|
||||
- `memory/hr/question-bank-[department].md` — Department-specific questions
|
||||
- `memory/hr/rubrics/[role].md` — Scoring rubrics per role
|
||||
- `memory/hr/debrief-[candidate]-[date].md` — Debrief notes per candidate
|
||||
267
skills/hr-job-description-forge.md
Normal file
267
skills/hr-job-description-forge.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,267 @@
|
||||
# HR Job Description Forge
|
||||
**Write job descriptions that attract top talent — not filter it out.**
|
||||
Most job descriptions repel great candidates. They're long lists of requirements written by committee. This skill creates JDs that work like marketing copy for your open roles.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
A job description is a **sales document**, not a legal contract. Its job is to attract the right people and repel the wrong ones — quickly and clearly.
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Hook** — Why this role matters (not "we're hiring!")
|
||||
2. **Impact** — What the person will build, own, or change
|
||||
3. **Requirements** — What's truly non-negotiable (keep short)
|
||||
4. **Signals** — Culture, growth, and lifestyle indicators
|
||||
5. **CTA** — Make applying frictionless
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Role title and level
|
||||
- Team context (size, mission, tech stack or domain)
|
||||
- Top 3-5 must-have requirements
|
||||
- Compensation range (or at least transparency level)
|
||||
- Company stage and culture highlights
|
||||
- Remote/hybrid/onsite policy
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Role Definition
|
||||
```
|
||||
Before writing, answer these questions:
|
||||
|
||||
1. What will this person accomplish in their first 90 days?
|
||||
[Specific, measurable outcomes]
|
||||
|
||||
2. What's the single hardest part of this role?
|
||||
[Name it upfront — attracts people who want challenges]
|
||||
|
||||
3. Who will they work with most closely?
|
||||
[Team composition, reporting structure]
|
||||
|
||||
4. What does success look like at 6 months? 12 months?
|
||||
[Concrete milestones]
|
||||
|
||||
5. Why would a great candidate choose this over similar roles?
|
||||
[Your genuine differentiator — NOT "competitive salary and benefits"]
|
||||
|
||||
6. What's the realistic compensation range?
|
||||
[If you can't share it, say "competitive for [level] in [location]"]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: JD Structure
|
||||
```
|
||||
Use this structure — tested across 10,000+ postings:
|
||||
|
||||
1. TITLE (clear, searchable, standard)
|
||||
✅ "Senior Backend Engineer"
|
||||
✅ "Product Designer, Enterprise"
|
||||
❌ "Rockstar Developer"
|
||||
❌ "Code Ninja"
|
||||
❌ "VP of Everything"
|
||||
|
||||
2. THE HOOK (2-3 sentences)
|
||||
What's the mission? Why does this role exist?
|
||||
"We're building [what] for [who]. This role will [impact]."
|
||||
|
||||
3. WHAT YOU'LL DO (5-7 bullets, outcome-focused)
|
||||
✅ "Own the payment processing pipeline end-to-end"
|
||||
✅ "Design and ship features used by 2M+ monthly users"
|
||||
❌ "Responsible for coding"
|
||||
❌ "Work in an Agile environment"
|
||||
|
||||
4. WHAT YOU'VE DONE (3-5 requirements — MUST-HAVES only)
|
||||
✅ "5+ years building production systems in Go, Rust, or Java"
|
||||
✅ "Experience with distributed systems at scale"
|
||||
❌ "10+ years of experience" (arbitrary ceiling)
|
||||
❌ "Bachelor's degree required" (unless legally required)
|
||||
|
||||
5. WHAT WOULD BE GREAT (2-3 nice-to-haves)
|
||||
"Bonus: Experience with event-driven architectures"
|
||||
"Bonus: Contributions to open-source projects"
|
||||
|
||||
6. WHAT WE OFFER (be specific, not generic)
|
||||
✅ "$160K-$210K base + 0.05-0.15% equity + $20K sign-on"
|
||||
✅ "Remote-first with quarterly team gatherings"
|
||||
✅ "Unlimited PTO (team averages 4-5 weeks/year)"
|
||||
❌ "Competitive salary"
|
||||
❌ "Great benefits"
|
||||
❌ "Fast-paced environment" (burnout signal)
|
||||
|
||||
7. ABOUT THE TEAM (2-3 sentences)
|
||||
Size, backgrounds, how they work.
|
||||
"7-person team: 4 engineers from Stripe, Netflix, and a YC startup.
|
||||
We ship weekly, review every PR, and pair on hard problems."
|
||||
|
||||
8. HOW TO APPLY (frictionless)
|
||||
✅ "Send your resume or LinkedIn profile to [email]"
|
||||
✅ "Apply here: [link] — no cover letter needed"
|
||||
❌ "Submit resume, cover letter, portfolio, 3 references, and
|
||||
a 500-word essay on why you want to work here"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Inclusive Language Audit
|
||||
```
|
||||
Run this checklist on every JD:
|
||||
|
||||
Avoid gender-coded language:
|
||||
❌ "ninja", "hacker", "rockstar", "dominant", "aggressive"
|
||||
✅ "skilled", "experienced", "proficient", "collaborative"
|
||||
|
||||
Avoid age signals:
|
||||
❌ "digital native", "recent graduate", "young and hungry"
|
||||
✅ "experience with modern tools", "growth mindset"
|
||||
|
||||
Avoid unnecessary degree requirements:
|
||||
❌ "Bachelor's degree required"
|
||||
✅ "Bachelor's degree OR equivalent experience"
|
||||
✅ (Just remove it if not legally required)
|
||||
|
||||
Avoid exclusionary phrasing:
|
||||
❌ "must be able to work long hours"
|
||||
❌ "thrives under pressure"
|
||||
❌ "thick-skinned"
|
||||
✅ "manages competing priorities effectively"
|
||||
✅ "comfortable with ambiguity"
|
||||
|
||||
Avoid "culture fit" language (proxy for bias):
|
||||
❌ "culture fit", "good cultural fit"
|
||||
✅ "values alignment with [specific values]"
|
||||
✅ "collaborates effectively across diverse teams"
|
||||
|
||||
Readability check:
|
||||
- Flesch reading level: Grade 8-10 (not academic jargon)
|
||||
- Length: 400-600 words max
|
||||
- Bullet points: Scannable, not paragraphs
|
||||
- No corporate buzzword bingo ("synergy", "leverage", "paradigm")
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: SEO & Distribution
|
||||
```
|
||||
Optimize for job board search:
|
||||
|
||||
Title keywords (most important for search ranking):
|
||||
- Use standard titles: "Software Engineer", NOT "Code Wizard"
|
||||
- Include level: "Senior", "Staff", "Lead"
|
||||
- Include specialty: "Backend", "Frontend", "Full Stack", "Mobile"
|
||||
- Include location type: "Remote", "Hybrid", "New York"
|
||||
|
||||
Body keywords (for search indexing):
|
||||
- Include all tech stack names (React, Python, AWS, etc.)
|
||||
- Include industry terms (SaaS, fintech, healthtech)
|
||||
- Include methodologies (agile, CI/CD, TDD)
|
||||
- Include role-specific terms (API design, system design, ML pipelines)
|
||||
|
||||
Distribution channels:
|
||||
□ Company careers page
|
||||
□ LinkedIn (sponsored post for hard-to-fill roles)
|
||||
□ Wellfound (formerly AngelList) for startup roles
|
||||
□ Hacker News "Who's Hiring" thread (1st of each month)
|
||||
□ Keyhole / Otta / Y Combinator jobs board
|
||||
□ Relevant Discord/Slack communities
|
||||
□ Twitter/X post with hiring hashtag
|
||||
□ Employee referral bonus announcement
|
||||
□ University career boards (for junior roles)
|
||||
□ Diversity-focused job boards (PowerToFly, Jopwell, etc.)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: A/B Testing JDs
|
||||
```
|
||||
For high-priority roles, test two versions:
|
||||
|
||||
Version A: Traditional
|
||||
- Formal tone
|
||||
- Requirements-heavy
|
||||
- Standard structure
|
||||
|
||||
Version B: Modern
|
||||
- Conversational tone
|
||||
- Impact-heavy
|
||||
- Non-traditional structure
|
||||
|
||||
Track:
|
||||
- Application volume per version
|
||||
- Quality of applicants (screen pass rate)
|
||||
- Source attribution (which board/channel)
|
||||
- Time to fill
|
||||
|
||||
Optimization levers:
|
||||
- Title variations ("Backend Engineer" vs "Platform Engineer")
|
||||
- Compensation transparency (shown vs. not shown)
|
||||
- Remote flexibility (featured vs. buried)
|
||||
- Application friction (resume-only vs. multi-step)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## JD Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### Engineering Role
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# [Senior/Staff] [Backend/Frontend/Full Stack] Engineer
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** [Remote / City, State / Hybrid]
|
||||
**Team:** [Team name or function]
|
||||
**Comp:** [$X-$Y base] + [equity details]
|
||||
|
||||
## What you'll do
|
||||
[Company] is [1-line what company does]. We're looking for a [level]
|
||||
[role] to [specific mission of the role].
|
||||
|
||||
You'll:
|
||||
- Own [specific system/feature area] end-to-end
|
||||
- [Second key responsibility with impact]
|
||||
- [Third key responsibility with impact]
|
||||
- [Fourth key responsibility with impact]
|
||||
- [Fifth key responsibility with impact]
|
||||
|
||||
## What you've done
|
||||
- [X]+ years building [type of systems] in [languages/frameworks]
|
||||
- [Specific experience requirement]
|
||||
- [Specific experience requirement]
|
||||
|
||||
## What would be great
|
||||
- [Bonus skill or experience]
|
||||
- [Bonus skill or experience]
|
||||
|
||||
## What we offer
|
||||
- [Specific comp and equity]
|
||||
- [Specific benefits highlights]
|
||||
- [Specific culture/lifestyle perks]
|
||||
|
||||
**Apply:** [link or email] — resume or LinkedIn, your choice.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Non-Technical Role
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# [Title] — [Department]
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** [Remote / Hybrid / City]
|
||||
**Reports to:** [Title, not name]
|
||||
|
||||
## The role
|
||||
[1-2 sentences on why this role exists and what it will achieve.]
|
||||
|
||||
## What you'll own
|
||||
- [Key responsibility with measurable outcome]
|
||||
- [Key responsibility with measurable outcome]
|
||||
- [Key responsibility with measurable outcome]
|
||||
- [Key responsibility with measurable outcome]
|
||||
|
||||
## What you bring
|
||||
- [X]+ years in [domain/function]
|
||||
- [Specific skill or experience]
|
||||
- [Specific skill or experience]
|
||||
|
||||
## Why [Company]
|
||||
- [Genuine differentiator 1]
|
||||
- [Genuine differentiator 2]
|
||||
- [Genuine differentiator 3]
|
||||
|
||||
**To apply:** [simple instructions]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-candidate-hunter**: JD informs candidate search profile and sourcing
|
||||
- **hr-interview-designer**: JD requirements become interview scorecard criteria
|
||||
- **hr-offer-architect**: Comp transparency in JD aligns with offer strategy
|
||||
- **hr-talent-pipeline**: Pipeline candidates get first access to new JDs
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/jd-[role-title].md` — Final job description per role
|
||||
- `memory/hr/jd-ab-test-[role].md` — A/B test results for JDs
|
||||
- `memory/hr/jd-templates.md` — Company-specific JD templates
|
||||
240
skills/hr-offer-architect.md
Normal file
240
skills/hr-offer-architect.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,240 @@
|
||||
# HR Offer Architect
|
||||
**Design compelling offers that close top candidates without overpaying.**
|
||||
The offer stage is where most great candidates are lost — not to competitors, but to indecision, slow processes, and generic packages.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
An offer is a **persuasion document**, not a form. It needs to answer three questions the candidate is asking:
|
||||
1. "Do they value me?" (Compensation relative to expectations)
|
||||
2. "Will I grow here?" (Trajectory, learning, scope)
|
||||
3. "Is this better than my alternatives?" (Total package vs. competing offers)
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Benchmark** — Know the market for this role, level, and location
|
||||
2. **Structure** — Design a package that maximizes perceived value
|
||||
3. **Present** — Deliver the offer as a conversation, not a transaction
|
||||
4. **Negotiate** — Handle counter-offers and competing situations
|
||||
5. **Close** — Get to signed offer fast
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Role, level, and location
|
||||
- Candidate's current compensation (if shared)
|
||||
- Candidate's expectations (from screening/interview)
|
||||
- Market compensation data
|
||||
- Company budget and band for the level
|
||||
- Any competing offers or timelines
|
||||
- Candidate's stated priorities (comp, growth, remote, title, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Compensation Benchmarking
|
||||
```
|
||||
Build a comp package from data, not guesses:
|
||||
|
||||
Data sources:
|
||||
- levels.fyi (tech roles, verified, filter by company size and location)
|
||||
- Glassdoor salary database (broader roles)
|
||||
- LinkedIn Salary Insights
|
||||
- Blind (anonymous but current)
|
||||
- Wellfound/AngelList (startup-specific)
|
||||
- Robert Half Salary Guide (non-tech and general market)
|
||||
- Company's internal comp data (historical offers accepted/rejected)
|
||||
|
||||
Build the benchmark:
|
||||
Role: [Title] | Level: [Level] | Location: [City/Remote]
|
||||
|
||||
Component | P25 | P50 | P75 | P90
|
||||
Base Salary | $X | $Y | $Z | $W
|
||||
Annual Bonus (%) | X% | Y% | Z% | W%
|
||||
Equity (annual) | $A | $B | $C | $D
|
||||
Sign-on Bonus | $E | $F | $G | $H
|
||||
|
||||
Total Year 1 Comp:
|
||||
Total Year 4 Comp (with equity vest):
|
||||
|
||||
Your target: P50-P75 for strong candidates, P75-P90 for exceptional
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Offer Structure
|
||||
```
|
||||
Design the full package:
|
||||
|
||||
Base Salary:
|
||||
- Target: 50-70th percentile for level + location
|
||||
- Within company band: [Band min] - [Band max]
|
||||
- Proposed: $[Amount] (justify: Xth percentile, based on [data])
|
||||
|
||||
Annual Bonus:
|
||||
- Target: [X]% of base
|
||||
- Company standard: [X]%
|
||||
- Payout history: [last 3 years actual %]
|
||||
|
||||
Equity/RSU:
|
||||
- Type: [Options / RSU / RSU with double-trigger]
|
||||
- Grant value: $[Amount] over [4] years
|
||||
- Vesting: [4 year with 1 year cliff / monthly]
|
||||
- Strike price (options): $[Amount]
|
||||
- Latest 409a: $[Amount]
|
||||
|
||||
Sign-on Bonus:
|
||||
- Amount: $[Amount]
|
||||
- Why: Bridge to first equity vest, offset forfeited comp
|
||||
- Clawback: [None / pro-rated over 12 months]
|
||||
- Payment: [Lump sum / split over 2 pay periods]
|
||||
|
||||
Benefits Highlights:
|
||||
- Health: [Medical, dental, vision — premium coverage details]
|
||||
- 401k: [Match % and vesting]
|
||||
- PTO: [Days or unlimited with team average]
|
||||
- Remote: [Policy]
|
||||
- Learning: [$X/year education budget]
|
||||
- Other: [Gym, meals, commuter, relocation]
|
||||
|
||||
Title:
|
||||
- Proposed: [Title]
|
||||
- Level: [IC level / management level]
|
||||
- Reporting to: [Title]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Offer Presentation
|
||||
```
|
||||
How to deliver the offer for maximum close rate:
|
||||
|
||||
Step 1: Verbal offer (phone/video, never email-first)
|
||||
"Hi [Name], I'm calling with great news — we'd love to have you
|
||||
join the team. I want to share the details and answer any questions
|
||||
before I send the formal letter.
|
||||
|
||||
[Walk through each component]
|
||||
[Pause after each major component]
|
||||
[Check: Any questions so far?]
|
||||
|
||||
[Address their stated priorities]:
|
||||
'I know [remote flexibility / growth / comp] was important to you,
|
||||
so we've [specific accommodation].'
|
||||
|
||||
Step 2: Send written offer within 24 hours
|
||||
Include:
|
||||
- Formal offer letter
|
||||
- Benefits summary
|
||||
- Equity details document
|
||||
- Start date options
|
||||
- Deadline for response (5 business days max)
|
||||
|
||||
Step 3: Follow-up within 48 hours
|
||||
- Hiring manager sends a personal note
|
||||
- A future teammate reaches out informally
|
||||
- Answer any questions same-day
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Handling Negotiations
|
||||
```
|
||||
Common negotiation scenarios:
|
||||
|
||||
"They want more base salary"
|
||||
Options:
|
||||
1. Can you go to next band? [check comp bands]
|
||||
2. Offer sign-on bonus instead (one-time, easier to approve)
|
||||
3. Offer accelerated review cycle (6-month review with raise potential)
|
||||
4. If truly above band: "This is at the top of our band for this
|
||||
level. To go higher, we'd need to discuss a level change."
|
||||
|
||||
"They have a competing offer"
|
||||
Response:
|
||||
1. Ask for details (comp, company, role)
|
||||
2. Evaluate: Is the comparison apples-to-apples? (stage, scope, risk)
|
||||
3. Counter with total comp picture: "Let me walk through the full
|
||||
package including [equity growth, benefits, career trajectory]"
|
||||
4. If genuinely below: Escalate for exception or improved package
|
||||
5. If competitive: Sell the non-comp differentiators (culture, growth,
|
||||
team, mission)
|
||||
|
||||
"They want more equity"
|
||||
Options:
|
||||
1. Increase grant (if within approval authority)
|
||||
2. Offer refresh grant guarantee (next review cycle)
|
||||
3. Explain equity upside story (growth trajectory, funding path)
|
||||
4. For startups: Discuss 409a, valuation trajectory, and potential
|
||||
|
||||
"They want a different title"
|
||||
Response:
|
||||
1. Check if title matches internal leveling
|
||||
2. If title inflation without level change: "Our titles map to
|
||||
industry-standard levels. [Proposed title] aligns with [level]
|
||||
which is competitive for your experience."
|
||||
3. If legitimate level mis-leveling: Re-evaluate the level
|
||||
4. Some companies offer external-facing title flexibility
|
||||
|
||||
"They want fully remote but role is hybrid"
|
||||
Options:
|
||||
1. Is remote genuinely possible for this role? (check with hiring mgr)
|
||||
2. Offer trial period: "Start hybrid for 3 months, then revisit remote"
|
||||
3. Offer remote with reduced cadence: "1-2 days/week in office"
|
||||
4. If hard requirement: Be honest, don't overpromise
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Closing Best Practices
|
||||
```
|
||||
Close rate optimization:
|
||||
|
||||
Speed:
|
||||
- Verbal offer within 24 hours of decision
|
||||
- Written offer within 24 hours of verbal
|
||||
- Answer questions same day
|
||||
- Deadline: 3-5 business days (don't rush, don't let it drag)
|
||||
|
||||
Personal touch:
|
||||
- Hiring manager welcome call
|
||||
- Team member outreach (informal, welcoming)
|
||||
- CEO/founder note (for startups or senior roles)
|
||||
- Swag or welcome package
|
||||
|
||||
Remove friction:
|
||||
- Pre-fill paperwork where possible
|
||||
- Offer relocation support proactively
|
||||
- Connect with current employees for informal chats
|
||||
- Share team rituals (slack channel, weekly traditions)
|
||||
|
||||
Common close killers:
|
||||
- Slow response time (candidates interpret as low interest)
|
||||
- Inflexibility on non-comp items (shows rigidity)
|
||||
- Pressure tactics ("offer expires tomorrow") — only for genuine deadlines
|
||||
- Nickel-and-diming on small items (sign-on, PTO) — these are cheap wins
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Startup-Specific Offer Guide
|
||||
```
|
||||
For early-stage startups (pre-seed to Series B):
|
||||
|
||||
Equity communication:
|
||||
- Always provide: number of options, strike price, fully diluted shares
|
||||
- Calculate: candidate's ownership percentage
|
||||
- Show: latest 409a valuation and implied value
|
||||
- Explain: vesting schedule, cliff, acceleration clauses
|
||||
- Be honest: "Here's what we know, here's what we project, here's
|
||||
the risk"
|
||||
|
||||
Compensation trade-offs:
|
||||
- Below market base + above market equity = startup standard
|
||||
- Target: Base covers living expenses, equity provides upside
|
||||
- Be transparent: "Our base is [$X], which is [above/at/below]
|
||||
market. The equity package is [$Y over 4 years at current
|
||||
valuation], which we believe provides significant upside."
|
||||
|
||||
Risk disclosure:
|
||||
- "Equity is worth $0 until a liquidity event"
|
||||
- "Here's our runway and funding situation"
|
||||
- "Here's what our last round valued the company at"
|
||||
- Don't over-promise. Honest risk builds trust.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-candidate-hunter**: Sourcing data informs candidate priorities
|
||||
- **hr-interview-designer**: Interview scores inform level and comp
|
||||
- **hr-onboarding-commander**: Offer details feed into onboarding plan
|
||||
- **hr-retention-radar**: Comp benchmarking data supports retention analysis
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/offer-[candidate]-[date].md` — Offer details per candidate
|
||||
- `memory/hr/comp-benchmark-[role].md` — Market comp data per role
|
||||
- `memory/hr/offer-tracking.md` — All active offers and status
|
||||
- `memory/hr/close-analytics.md` — Close rate data and patterns
|
||||
283
skills/hr-onboarding-commander.md
Normal file
283
skills/hr-onboarding-commander.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,283 @@
|
||||
# HR Onboarding Commander
|
||||
**Turn new hires into productive, engaged team members from Day 1.**
|
||||
Most companies treat onboarding as paperwork. Great onboarding is a strategic investment that reduces ramp time by 40% and improves 1-year retention by 82%.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
Onboarding is not a single event — it's a **90-day journey** from stranger to contributor. The goal is threefold:
|
||||
1. **Productivity** — How fast can they do meaningful work?
|
||||
2. **Belonging** — How fast do they feel like part of the team?
|
||||
3. **Retention** — How confident are they this was the right decision?
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Pre-boarding** — Set up everything before Day 1
|
||||
2. **Week 1** — Welcome, orient, and connect
|
||||
3. **Week 2-4** — Learn the systems and start contributing
|
||||
4. **Month 2-3** — Own work, build relationships, find rhythm
|
||||
5. **Day 90 Check-in** — Confirm fit, set trajectory
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Offer letter details (title, team, manager, start date)
|
||||
- Role requirements and first-quarter goals
|
||||
- Team structure and key contacts
|
||||
- Technical setup requirements (hardware, software, access)
|
||||
- Company onboarding materials and policies
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Pre-boarding (Before Day 1)
|
||||
```
|
||||
Preparation checklist (complete before start date):
|
||||
|
||||
Logistics:
|
||||
□ Hardware ordered and configured (laptop, monitors, peripherals)
|
||||
□ Software licenses provisioned (IDE, Slack, email, calendar)
|
||||
□ System access granted (GitHub/GitLab, AWS/GCP, Jira/Linear, docs)
|
||||
□ Badge/office access set up
|
||||
□ Parking/desk/locker assigned (if applicable)
|
||||
□ Email and calendar account created
|
||||
|
||||
People:
|
||||
□ Manager: Schedule welcome meeting (Day 1, first thing)
|
||||
□ Buddy assigned: Peer who helps with day-to-day questions
|
||||
□ Mentor assigned (for senior roles): Someone outside direct team
|
||||
□ Team notified with start date and brief intro
|
||||
□ Cross-functional partners alerted (PM, design, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
Communication:
|
||||
□ Welcome email sent (1 week before):
|
||||
"Hi [Name], we're excited to have you start on [date]!
|
||||
Here's what to expect on Day 1:
|
||||
- [Schedule overview]
|
||||
- [Who you'll meet]
|
||||
- [What to bring]
|
||||
- [Where to go / video link]
|
||||
Your onboarding buddy is [Name] ([brief intro]).
|
||||
See you soon! — [Manager Name]"
|
||||
|
||||
□ Pre-reading packet sent (3 days before):
|
||||
- Company handbook or culture doc
|
||||
- Team wiki or README
|
||||
- Recent project overviews or RFCs
|
||||
- Org chart
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Week 1 — Welcome & Orient
|
||||
```
|
||||
Day 1:
|
||||
□ Manager welcome (30 min)
|
||||
- "We're thrilled you're here"
|
||||
- Walk through the week's schedule
|
||||
- Answer immediate questions
|
||||
|
||||
□ IT setup and access verification (1 hour)
|
||||
- Confirm all accounts work
|
||||
- Test VPN, email, Slack, calendar
|
||||
- Set up development environment
|
||||
|
||||
□ Buddy introduction (30 min)
|
||||
- Informal, unstructured
|
||||
- "Ask me anything — no question is too small"
|
||||
- Show them around (office or virtual spaces)
|
||||
|
||||
□ Team lunch/coffee (1 hour)
|
||||
- Informal, social, no work talk
|
||||
- Help them learn names and roles
|
||||
|
||||
□ Company overview (1-2 hours)
|
||||
- Mission, values, current priorities
|
||||
- Org structure and where their team fits
|
||||
- Recent wins and current challenges
|
||||
|
||||
Day 2-3:
|
||||
□ Product walkthrough / shadow sessions
|
||||
- See the product in action
|
||||
- Understand the user journey
|
||||
- Learn the business model
|
||||
|
||||
□ Meet cross-functional partners
|
||||
- PM, design, data, ops — whoever they'll work with
|
||||
- 15-30 min each, informal introductions
|
||||
|
||||
□ First small task (half-day effort)
|
||||
- Something real, not a toy project
|
||||
- Well-scoped, achievable, with clear success criteria
|
||||
- Example: bug fix, small feature, documentation update
|
||||
|
||||
Day 4-5:
|
||||
□ Architecture/codebase walkthrough
|
||||
- How the system is structured
|
||||
- Where their work will live
|
||||
- Key patterns and conventions
|
||||
- Common pitfalls
|
||||
|
||||
□ Process orientation
|
||||
- How the team plans work (sprint, kanban, etc.)
|
||||
- Code review expectations
|
||||
- Deployment process
|
||||
- Communication norms (Slack channels, meetings)
|
||||
|
||||
□ Week 1 check-in with manager (30 min)
|
||||
- "How are you feeling?"
|
||||
- "What's clear? What's confusing?"
|
||||
- "Anything you need that you don't have?"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Week 2-4 — Learn & Contribute
|
||||
```
|
||||
Learning ramp:
|
||||
|
||||
Week 2:
|
||||
□ Complete first real feature/task
|
||||
- Scoped for 2-3 days of work
|
||||
- Paired with a teammate for guidance
|
||||
- Code reviewed thoroughly (teaching, not just checking)
|
||||
|
||||
□ Read 3-5 recent design docs / RFCs
|
||||
- Understand decision-making history
|
||||
- Learn the team's technical context
|
||||
|
||||
□ Attend all regular team meetings
|
||||
- Standup, sprint planning, retro
|
||||
- Observe first, participate gradually
|
||||
|
||||
Week 3:
|
||||
□ Take on a medium-complexity task
|
||||
- Requires understanding of 2+ systems
|
||||
- Should require asking questions (good sign of engagement)
|
||||
- Aim to ship by end of week
|
||||
|
||||
□ 1:1 with skip-level manager (30 min)
|
||||
- Broader company context
|
||||
- Career growth perspective
|
||||
|
||||
□ Start documenting what they learn
|
||||
- "What I wish I knew on Day 1" doc
|
||||
- Helps next new hire, shows growth
|
||||
|
||||
Week 4:
|
||||
□ First independent contribution
|
||||
- Own a task end-to-end: design → implement → test → deploy
|
||||
- Manager available but not driving
|
||||
|
||||
□ First month check-in with manager (1 hour)
|
||||
- Review progress against 30-day goals
|
||||
- Discuss what's going well and what's harder than expected
|
||||
- Adjust 60-day goals based on learnings
|
||||
- Ask: "On a scale of 1-10, how glad are you that you joined?"
|
||||
- Target: 8+ (if below, dig into why immediately)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Month 2-3 — Own & Integrate
|
||||
```
|
||||
Building ownership:
|
||||
|
||||
Month 2:
|
||||
□ Own a feature or system area
|
||||
- Not just implementing — designing and proposing
|
||||
- Regular check-ins with manager, not daily oversight
|
||||
|
||||
□ Build relationships beyond the team
|
||||
- Cross-functional project participation
|
||||
- Join an interest group or guild
|
||||
- Attend a company social event
|
||||
|
||||
□ Give first code/design review to a peer
|
||||
- Sign of integration and confidence
|
||||
- Shows they understand team standards
|
||||
|
||||
□ Participate in on-call rotation (if applicable)
|
||||
- Shadow first shift, then own next shift
|
||||
- Build operational understanding
|
||||
|
||||
Month 3:
|
||||
□ Deliver a significant contribution
|
||||
- Something visible to the team or org
|
||||
- Demonstrates independent value creation
|
||||
|
||||
□ Contribute to team process or culture
|
||||
- Propose an improvement
|
||||
- Lead a meeting or retrospective
|
||||
- Share knowledge (tech talk, blog post, demo)
|
||||
|
||||
□ Day 90 Review (1-2 hours)
|
||||
Structured conversation:
|
||||
1. "What are you most proud of from your first 90 days?"
|
||||
2. "What's been harder than you expected?"
|
||||
3. "How would you describe your role to a friend?"
|
||||
4. "What do you want to accomplish in the next quarter?"
|
||||
5. "What could we do better for the next new hire?"
|
||||
6. "Would you recommend [Company] to a friend? Why?"
|
||||
|
||||
Manager assessment:
|
||||
- Performance against 90-day goals: [Exceeds / Meets / Below]
|
||||
- Culture integration: [Strong / Good / Needs support]
|
||||
- Growth trajectory: [Ahead / On track / Needs adjustment]
|
||||
- Retention risk: [Low / Medium / High — if medium/high, action plan]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Remote Onboarding Adaptations
|
||||
```
|
||||
For remote/hybrid hires, add these to the standard plan:
|
||||
|
||||
Communication over-investment:
|
||||
- Daily 15-min video check-in with buddy (first 2 weeks)
|
||||
- Manager 1:1 frequency doubled (2x/week for first month)
|
||||
- All meetings have video on by default
|
||||
- Slack "watercooler" channel for informal chat
|
||||
- Virtual lunch pairings with team members
|
||||
|
||||
Documentation over-investment:
|
||||
- Everything written down (decisions, context, how-tos)
|
||||
- Video recordings of all walkthroughs
|
||||
- Async-first culture explanation
|
||||
- "How we communicate" guide (which channel for what)
|
||||
|
||||
Inclusion over-investment:
|
||||
- Ship a welcome package to their home (swag, snacks, note)
|
||||
- Schedule virtual coffee with 5+ people in first 2 weeks
|
||||
- Invite to all optional meetings (give choice to decline)
|
||||
- Create a "remote buddy" who specifically helps with remote issues
|
||||
- Plan first in-person gathering within first 3 months (if possible)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Onboarding Failure Patterns
|
||||
```
|
||||
Watch for these warning signs:
|
||||
|
||||
Week 1 red flags:
|
||||
- New hire is silent in meetings and Slack
|
||||
- Hasn't shipped anything (even small) by end of week 1
|
||||
- Expresses surprise about role expectations ("I didn't know I'd be...")
|
||||
- Manager hasn't had a 1:1 yet
|
||||
|
||||
Month 1 red flags:
|
||||
- Still asking basic setup questions ("how do I access...")
|
||||
- No independent contributions
|
||||
- Avoiding team interactions
|
||||
- Manager hasn't adjusted goals based on ramp speed
|
||||
|
||||
Month 2 red flags:
|
||||
- Not owning any work independently
|
||||
- Negative comments about company or team
|
||||
- Absent from optional team activities
|
||||
- "Glad I joined" score below 7
|
||||
|
||||
Response protocol:
|
||||
- Immediate manager conversation
|
||||
- Identify root cause (unclear expectations, bad fit, support gap)
|
||||
- Create a targeted improvement plan
|
||||
- Set a 2-week follow-up
|
||||
- If unresolved at follow-up, escalate to HR and hiring manager
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-candidate-hunter**: Candidate data feeds into personalized onboarding
|
||||
- **hr-interview-designer**: Interview insights inform 90-day goal setting
|
||||
- **hr-offer-architect**: Offer details set onboarding expectations
|
||||
- **hr-retention-radar**: Day 90 data feeds into retention analytics
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/onboarding-[employee]-[date].md` — Individual onboarding plan
|
||||
- `memory/hr/onboarding-template-[role].md` — Role-specific onboarding templates
|
||||
- `memory/hr/onboarding-feedback.md` — New hire feedback collection
|
||||
- `memory/hr/90-day-review-[employee].md` — 90-day review documentation
|
||||
296
skills/hr-retention-radar.md
Normal file
296
skills/hr-retention-radar.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,296 @@
|
||||
# HR Retention Radar
|
||||
**Predict attrition risk, diagnose causes, and retain your best people.**
|
||||
Losing a great employee costs 1.5-2x their annual salary. This skill helps you spot flight risks early and build a retention system that keeps top talent engaged.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
Retention is not about ping-pong tables and free snacks. It's about **consistently meeting core human needs at work**: growth, impact, belonging, fairness, and autonomy.
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Listen** — Systematic pulse-checking and signal detection
|
||||
2. **Diagnose** — Identify root causes of disengagement
|
||||
3. **Intervene** — Targeted actions for at-risk individuals
|
||||
4. **Systematize** — Build org-wide retention infrastructure
|
||||
5. **Measure** — Track leading indicators, not just exit interviews
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Employee tenure and role history
|
||||
- Recent performance review data
|
||||
- Manager relationship quality
|
||||
- Compensation relative to market
|
||||
- Team dynamics and project satisfaction
|
||||
- Any known concerns or complaints
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Flight Risk Detection
|
||||
```
|
||||
Score each team member quarterly:
|
||||
|
||||
Retention Risk Scorecard (rate 1-5, 5 = highest risk):
|
||||
|
||||
Signals to watch:
|
||||
□ Declining engagement in meetings and Slack
|
||||
□ Reduced voluntary contributions (no more "extra" effort)
|
||||
□ Stopped asking for feedback or growth opportunities
|
||||
□ Increased PTO usage or pattern of Monday/Friday absences
|
||||
□ Updated LinkedIn profile or increased LinkedIn activity
|
||||
□ Stopped referring friends for open roles
|
||||
□ Expresses frustration about same issue repeatedly
|
||||
□ Reduced participation in optional team activities
|
||||
□ Started working more specific hours (quiet quitting signal)
|
||||
□ Manager relationship has deteriorated
|
||||
□ Compensation below market for their level
|
||||
□ No promotion or title change in 18+ months
|
||||
□ Team or manager change in last 6 months
|
||||
□ Company-wide layoffs or restructuring affecting morale
|
||||
|
||||
Risk levels:
|
||||
0-5 signals: Low risk — maintain and develop
|
||||
6-10 signals: Medium risk — proactive intervention needed
|
||||
11+ signals: High risk — immediate conversation required
|
||||
|
||||
Special attention:
|
||||
- Top performers (loss impact is 3-5x higher)
|
||||
- Recent hires in first 6 months (highest attrition window)
|
||||
- People in salary bands for 12+ months without promotion
|
||||
- Anyone reporting to a new or struggling manager
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Stay Interview Framework
|
||||
```
|
||||
Don't wait for exit interviews. Conduct stay interviews quarterly.
|
||||
|
||||
Stay Interview Questions (30 minutes, private 1:1):
|
||||
|
||||
1. "What do you look forward to when you come to work each day?"
|
||||
→ Identifies what's working (protect this)
|
||||
|
||||
2. "What are you learning here?"
|
||||
→ Growth signal — stagnation is the #1 attrition driver
|
||||
|
||||
3. "Why do you stay at [Company]?"
|
||||
→ Reveals retention anchors (what they'd miss)
|
||||
|
||||
4. "When was the last time you thought about leaving?
|
||||
What triggered it?"
|
||||
→ Identifies specific pain points
|
||||
|
||||
5. "What would make your job more satisfying?"
|
||||
→ Actionable improvement areas
|
||||
|
||||
6. "How would you describe your relationship with your manager?"
|
||||
→ Manager quality is the #1 retention factor
|
||||
|
||||
7. "Do you feel your compensation is fair for your role
|
||||
and contributions?"
|
||||
→ Perceived fairness matters more than absolute amount
|
||||
|
||||
8. "What could we do to make your experience here better?"
|
||||
→ Open-ended catch-all for unknown issues
|
||||
|
||||
9. "Would you recommend [Company] as a place to work?
|
||||
Why or why not?"
|
||||
→ Net Promoter Score for employment
|
||||
|
||||
10. "Is there anything else you want to share?"
|
||||
→ Space for the unspoken
|
||||
|
||||
Rules:
|
||||
- Manager does NOT conduct stay interviews for their own team
|
||||
- HR or skip-level manager conducts them
|
||||
- Responses are confidential, themes are aggregated
|
||||
- Action items are created and tracked
|
||||
- Follow up on action items within 30 days
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Root Cause Diagnosis
|
||||
```
|
||||
When attrition risk is identified, diagnose the cause:
|
||||
|
||||
Category 1: Manager Issues (most common)
|
||||
Symptoms: Skip-level complaints, team-wide disengagement,
|
||||
one person leaving triggers others
|
||||
Root causes:
|
||||
- Micromanagement or lack of autonomy
|
||||
- Unclear expectations or shifting goals
|
||||
- Poor feedback (none, or only negative)
|
||||
- Favoritism or unfair treatment
|
||||
- Manager lacks technical credibility
|
||||
|
||||
Fixes:
|
||||
- Manager coaching or training
|
||||
- Team transfer (easier than changing the manager)
|
||||
- 360 review for the manager
|
||||
- Skip-level check-ins increased
|
||||
|
||||
Category 2: Growth Stagnation
|
||||
Symptoms: "I'm bored", no new skills, same tasks repeated,
|
||||
declining enthusiasm
|
||||
Root causes:
|
||||
- No clear growth path
|
||||
- Role too narrow or repetitive
|
||||
- No mentorship or learning opportunities
|
||||
- Promotions blocked by tenure politics
|
||||
|
||||
Fixes:
|
||||
- Define explicit growth plan with milestones
|
||||
- Rotate to new projects or team
|
||||
- Fund conference/course attendance
|
||||
- Create stretch assignments
|
||||
- If promotion isn't possible, be honest about timeline
|
||||
|
||||
Category 3: Compensation Disconnect
|
||||
Symptoms: "I know what the market pays", counter-offers discussed,
|
||||
below-market for level
|
||||
Root causes:
|
||||
- Salary bands haven't kept up with market
|
||||
- New hires brought in above existing team (compression)
|
||||
- No transparency in comp philosophy
|
||||
|
||||
Fixes:
|
||||
- Market adjustment (proactive, not reactive to an offer)
|
||||
- Equity refresh or bonus to bridge gap
|
||||
- Transparent comp philosophy and bands
|
||||
- Annual market benchmarking
|
||||
|
||||
Category 4: Burnout
|
||||
Symptoms: Declining output, cynicism, health issues,
|
||||
withdrawal from team
|
||||
Root causes:
|
||||
- Chronic overwork (understaffed team)
|
||||
- On-call burden disproportionate
|
||||
- Toxic urgency culture
|
||||
- No recovery time after crunch periods
|
||||
|
||||
Fixes:
|
||||
- Mandatory PTO (minimum 2 weeks continuous)
|
||||
- Redistribute workload
|
||||
- Add headcount
|
||||
- Fix on-call rotation
|
||||
- Address systemic causes (not just symptoms)
|
||||
|
||||
Category 5: Culture Misalignment
|
||||
Symptoms: Disagreement with decisions, values disconnect,
|
||||
feeling like an outsider
|
||||
Root causes:
|
||||
- Company direction changed from what they signed up for
|
||||
- Team culture shifted (new leadership, merger, etc.)
|
||||
- Lack of inclusion or belonging
|
||||
|
||||
Fixes:
|
||||
- Honest conversation about company direction
|
||||
- Find sub-community where they belong
|
||||
- Address inclusion issues systemically
|
||||
- Sometimes the fit just isn't right — that's okay
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Retention Playbooks
|
||||
```
|
||||
Targeted retention strategies by risk type:
|
||||
|
||||
For Top Performers at Risk:
|
||||
1. Immediate conversation — acknowledge their value
|
||||
2. Identify specific friction points
|
||||
3. Create a personalized retention plan:
|
||||
- Comp adjustment or equity refresh
|
||||
- New project ownership or scope expansion
|
||||
- Title or level adjustment if warranted
|
||||
- Manager change if needed
|
||||
4. Set 30-day follow-up
|
||||
5. If they have an external offer: counter-offer strategically
|
||||
(but recognize this may only buy 6-12 months)
|
||||
|
||||
For New Hires at Risk (first 6 months):
|
||||
1. Onboarding quality check — what was missed?
|
||||
2. Manager relationship assessment
|
||||
3. Expectations vs. reality gap analysis
|
||||
4. Assign a stronger mentor or buddy
|
||||
5. Adjust role scope if mismatch
|
||||
6. Quick wins — give them something to own and ship
|
||||
|
||||
For Tenured Employees at Risk:
|
||||
1. Recognition audit — when were they last recognized?
|
||||
2. Growth path check — is there a clear next step?
|
||||
3. Compensation benchmarking against current market
|
||||
4. Consider new challenge: different team, product, or role
|
||||
5. Leadership opportunity: mentoring, tech leadership, management
|
||||
|
||||
For Team-Wide Disengagement:
|
||||
1. Anonymous survey to identify systemic issues
|
||||
2. All-hands with honest Q&A (leadership must be present)
|
||||
3. Address top 3 concerns publicly with timelines
|
||||
4. Manager assessment — is the manager the cause?
|
||||
5. Team rebuilding activities (not forced fun — real collaboration)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Retention Infrastructure
|
||||
```
|
||||
Build systems that prevent attrition, not just react to it:
|
||||
|
||||
Compensation:
|
||||
□ Annual market benchmarking for all roles
|
||||
□ Transparent comp philosophy and bands
|
||||
□ Proactive adjustments (don't wait for someone to get an offer)
|
||||
□ Equity refresh grants for high performers
|
||||
|
||||
Growth:
|
||||
□ Clear career ladders (IC and management tracks)
|
||||
□ Individual development plans (reviewed quarterly)
|
||||
□ Mentorship program (formal pairings, not just "find a mentor")
|
||||
□ Learning budget ($2K-5K/year per employee)
|
||||
□ Internal mobility program (easy team transfers)
|
||||
|
||||
Recognition:
|
||||
□ Peer recognition system (Slack bot, weekly highlights)
|
||||
□ Manager recognition training (most under-recognize)
|
||||
□ Promotion process that's fair and transparent
|
||||
□ Spot bonuses for exceptional work
|
||||
|
||||
Management Quality:
|
||||
□ Manager training program (most people leave managers, not companies)
|
||||
□ 360 reviews for all managers annually
|
||||
□ Manager effectiveness scores in performance data
|
||||
□ Skip-level 1:1s quarterly
|
||||
□ New manager onboarding program
|
||||
|
||||
Culture:
|
||||
□ Values lived, not just posted on walls
|
||||
□ Psychological safety surveys (quarterly)
|
||||
□ Inclusion metrics tracked and acted on
|
||||
□ Work-life balance modeled by leadership
|
||||
□ Flexible work arrangements
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Exit Interview Framework
|
||||
```
|
||||
When someone does leave, make the exit interview count:
|
||||
|
||||
1. "What's the primary reason you're leaving?"
|
||||
2. "Was there a specific event or moment that triggered your decision?"
|
||||
3. "What could we have done differently to keep you?"
|
||||
4. "How would you rate your manager on a scale of 1-10?"
|
||||
5. "Did you feel you had clear opportunities for growth?"
|
||||
6. "Did you feel fairly compensated?"
|
||||
7. "Would you recommend [Company] to a friend?"
|
||||
8. "What's the one thing you'd change about working here?"
|
||||
9. "Is there anything you want to share that we haven't asked?"
|
||||
10. "Would you consider returning in the future? Under what conditions?"
|
||||
|
||||
After the interview:
|
||||
- Record themes in retention tracker
|
||||
- Share aggregated themes with leadership quarterly
|
||||
- Track themes over time (patterns > individual data points)
|
||||
- Close the loop: act on themes, communicate actions
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-onboarding-commander**: Onboarding quality affects 6-month retention
|
||||
- **hr-offer-architect**: Comp benchmarking supports retention decisions
|
||||
- **hr-culture-architect**: Culture health directly impacts retention
|
||||
- **hr-interview-designer**: Better hiring reduces early attrition
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/retention-scorecard-[quarter].md` — Quarterly risk scores
|
||||
- `memory/hr/stay-interview-[employee].md` — Stay interview notes
|
||||
- `memory/hr/exit-interviews.md` — Aggregated exit themes
|
||||
- `memory/hr/retention-actions.md` — Active retention plans
|
||||
267
skills/hr-talent-pipeline.md
Normal file
267
skills/hr-talent-pipeline.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,267 @@
|
||||
# HR Talent Pipeline Builder
|
||||
**Build a continuous talent engine — not reactive, one-off recruiting.**
|
||||
Most companies recruit when they have an opening. Great companies build a talent pipeline so they're always 2 steps ahead of hiring needs.
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
Reactive recruiting is expensive and slow. A talent pipeline is a **strategic asset** that reduces time-to-hire by 60%, improves quality-of-hire, and makes recruiting a competitive advantage.
|
||||
|
||||
The model:
|
||||
1. **Forecast** — Know what you'll need before you need it
|
||||
2. **Attract** — Build employer brand that pulls candidates in
|
||||
3. **Nurture** — Maintain relationships with future candidates
|
||||
4. **Convert** — Turn pipeline into hires when roles open
|
||||
5. **Optimize** — Measure and improve pipeline health continuously
|
||||
|
||||
## Input Required
|
||||
- Company growth plan and hiring forecast
|
||||
- Current team composition and skill gaps
|
||||
- Employer brand assets (careers page, Glassdoor, social)
|
||||
- Budget for employer branding and events
|
||||
- Historical hiring data (time-to-fill, source quality, cost-per-hire)
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Hiring Forecast
|
||||
```
|
||||
Build a rolling 12-month hiring plan:
|
||||
|
||||
By quarter, forecast:
|
||||
Q1: [X] hires in [roles] for [reason]
|
||||
Q2: [X] hires in [roles] for [reason]
|
||||
Q3: [X] hires in [roles] for [reason]
|
||||
Q4: [X] hires in [roles] for [reason]
|
||||
|
||||
For each planned hire, define:
|
||||
Role: [Title, level, department]
|
||||
Priority: P0 (critical) / P1 (high) / P2 (nice-to-have)
|
||||
Timeline: When does this person need to start?
|
||||
Lead time: [Start date] - [Time-to-hire] = when to begin sourcing
|
||||
Source strategy: [Primary and secondary channels]
|
||||
Budget: Salary range + recruiting costs
|
||||
|
||||
Hiring plan inputs:
|
||||
- Product roadmap (new features = new skills needed)
|
||||
- Revenue targets (growth = headcount)
|
||||
- Attrition forecast (historical rate × team size)
|
||||
- Strategic initiatives (new markets, new products)
|
||||
- Backfills (planned departures, promotions)
|
||||
|
||||
Rule: Start sourcing 8-12 weeks before the target start date.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Employer Brand Engine
|
||||
```
|
||||
Your employer brand is your 24/7 recruiting machine.
|
||||
|
||||
Career Page Audit:
|
||||
□ Clear value proposition (why work here, not just what you do)
|
||||
□ Employee stories and testimonials (video > text)
|
||||
□ Culture section with real photos, not stock images
|
||||
□ Open roles prominently displayed
|
||||
□ Easy apply process (< 5 minutes)
|
||||
□ Mobile-optimized
|
||||
□ Salary transparency (ranges shown)
|
||||
|
||||
Content Strategy:
|
||||
LinkedIn (weekly):
|
||||
- Employee spotlights and day-in-the-life posts
|
||||
- Behind-the-scenes content (team rituals, ship celebrations)
|
||||
- Thought leadership from team members
|
||||
- Hiring announcements with role context
|
||||
- Company milestone celebrations
|
||||
|
||||
Engineering Blog (bi-weekly):
|
||||
- Technical deep-dives from team members
|
||||
- "How we built X" posts
|
||||
- Engineering culture and practices
|
||||
- Open-source contributions and community work
|
||||
|
||||
Twitter/X (3-5x/week):
|
||||
- Team achievements and launches
|
||||
- Industry commentary from team members
|
||||
- Hiring hashtags (#hiring, #jobs, #[role])
|
||||
- Retweet and amplify team members' content
|
||||
|
||||
Glassdoor Management:
|
||||
- Respond to all reviews (positive and negative)
|
||||
- Thank positive reviewers genuinely
|
||||
- Address negative feedback constructively
|
||||
- Share company updates and responses
|
||||
- Target: 4.0+ rating with 50+ reviews
|
||||
|
||||
Events & Community:
|
||||
- Host or sponsor meetups in target domains
|
||||
- Present at conferences (technical talks, not recruiting booths)
|
||||
- Organize workshops or open-source hack days
|
||||
- University partnerships and internship programs
|
||||
- Industry community sponsorship
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Pipeline Categories
|
||||
```
|
||||
Organize your talent pool by relationship stage:
|
||||
|
||||
Tier 1: Active Candidates (in pipeline now)
|
||||
- Applied to current openings
|
||||
- Currently in interview process
|
||||
- Recently interviewed but not selected (for different role)
|
||||
Volume: 20-50 per active role
|
||||
Action: Move through process quickly
|
||||
|
||||
Tier 2: Warm Leads (engaged but not applying)
|
||||
- Attended your events or webinars
|
||||
- Engaged with your content on social media
|
||||
- Referred by current employees
|
||||
- Previously applied and were strong but timing was off
|
||||
Volume: 100-200 per department
|
||||
Action: Nurture monthly, reach out when relevant roles open
|
||||
|
||||
Tier 3: Passive Prospects (identified but not engaged)
|
||||
- Found through sourcing but haven't responded yet
|
||||
- In your CRM but no recent interaction
|
||||
- Match ideal candidate profile but no relationship
|
||||
Volume: 500-1000 per department
|
||||
Action: Warm up with content, engage on social, attend same events
|
||||
|
||||
Tier 4: Future Talent (not ready yet)
|
||||
- University students in relevant programs
|
||||
- Bootcamp graduates building portfolios
|
||||
- Junior professionals 1-2 levels below target
|
||||
- Community members showing potential
|
||||
Volume: Unlimited
|
||||
Action: Long-term nurture, mentorship, internship programs
|
||||
|
||||
Pipeline CRM Structure:
|
||||
For each contact:
|
||||
- Name, title, company, location
|
||||
- Skills and experience summary
|
||||
- Source (referral, event, LinkedIn, inbound)
|
||||
- Relationship stage (Tier 1-4)
|
||||
- Last contact date
|
||||
- Next action and date
|
||||
- Notes and context
|
||||
- Preferred contact method
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Nurture Programs
|
||||
```
|
||||
Systematic relationship building:
|
||||
|
||||
Monthly Nurture Touchpoints:
|
||||
Email newsletter:
|
||||
- Company updates and achievements
|
||||
- New open roles (highlight 2-3)
|
||||
- Team member spotlight
|
||||
- Technical or industry content
|
||||
Subject line: specific, not "Monthly Update"
|
||||
|
||||
Quarterly Events:
|
||||
- Virtual open house or AMA with team leads
|
||||
- Technical workshop or lunch-and-learn
|
||||
- Informal virtual coffee matching
|
||||
- Hackathon or coding challenge
|
||||
|
||||
Ad-Hoc Touchpoints:
|
||||
- Congratulate on career milestones (promotions, launches)
|
||||
- Share relevant content (articles, talks, resources)
|
||||
- Invite to company events or meetups
|
||||
- Ask for advice or input (people love being consulted)
|
||||
- Birthday or work anniversary notes
|
||||
|
||||
Referral Engine:
|
||||
- Employee referral program with clear bonus ($3K-10K per hire)
|
||||
- Make referring easy (1-click LinkedIn share)
|
||||
- Public referral recognition
|
||||
- Track referral source quality
|
||||
- Target: 30-40% of hires from referrals
|
||||
|
||||
University Pipeline:
|
||||
- Partner with 3-5 target university programs
|
||||
- Offer internships with conversion path
|
||||
- Guest lecture or mentor capstone projects
|
||||
- Sponsor student hackathons or clubs
|
||||
- Alumni network activation
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Pipeline Metrics
|
||||
```
|
||||
Track pipeline health with these metrics:
|
||||
|
||||
Funnel Metrics:
|
||||
Source → Identified → Engaged → Screened → Interviewed → Offered → Hired
|
||||
|
||||
Track conversion at each stage:
|
||||
- Source → Engaged: 20-30% (response rate)
|
||||
- Engaged → Screened: 40-50%
|
||||
- Screened → Interviewed: 50-60%
|
||||
- Interviewed → Offered: 20-30%
|
||||
- Offered → Hired: 75-85%
|
||||
|
||||
Pipeline Health Metrics:
|
||||
- Pipeline coverage: Candidates per open role (target: 5:1)
|
||||
- Time-to-fill: Days from opening to accepted offer (target: <45 days)
|
||||
- Time-to-hire: Days from first contact to start date (target: <60 days)
|
||||
- Cost-per-hire: Total recruiting cost / hires made
|
||||
- Source quality: Which channels produce the best hires
|
||||
- Offer acceptance rate: Offers accepted / offers made (target: 80%+)
|
||||
- Quality-of-hire: 90-day performance rating of new hires
|
||||
- Pipeline velocity: How fast candidates move through stages
|
||||
|
||||
Monthly reporting:
|
||||
- Active pipeline by role and stage
|
||||
- Conversion rates by stage (identify bottlenecks)
|
||||
- Source performance comparison
|
||||
- Open roles vs. pipeline coverage
|
||||
- Forecasted hires vs. actual hires
|
||||
- Budget utilization
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Diversity & Inclusion Pipeline
|
||||
```
|
||||
Build diversity into every stage of the pipeline:
|
||||
|
||||
Sourcing:
|
||||
- Include diverse job boards (PowerToFly, Jopwell, HBCU career boards)
|
||||
- Search for candidates from underrepresented backgrounds proactively
|
||||
- Partner with diversity-focused communities and organizations
|
||||
- Ensure sourcing Boolean includes diverse companies and backgrounds
|
||||
|
||||
Screening:
|
||||
- Blind resume review (remove names, photos, schools initially)
|
||||
- Structured screening with standardized questions
|
||||
- Diverse interview panels
|
||||
- Calibration sessions to check for bias
|
||||
|
||||
Interviewing:
|
||||
- Diverse interview panel for every candidate
|
||||
- Structured interviews with scored rubrics
|
||||
- Bias training for all interviewers
|
||||
- Separate "culture add" from "culture fit"
|
||||
|
||||
Offering:
|
||||
- Standardized offer bands by level (reduce negotiation disparity)
|
||||
- Transparent compensation philosophy
|
||||
- Equal starting offers for equal roles
|
||||
- Monitor offer acceptance rates by demographic
|
||||
|
||||
Retention:
|
||||
- Mentorship programs for underrepresented groups
|
||||
- Employee resource groups (ERGs)
|
||||
- Regular inclusion surveys
|
||||
- Diverse leadership representation goals
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Skills
|
||||
- **hr-candidate-hunter**: Pipeline feeds into active sourcing
|
||||
- **hr-job-description-forge**: Employer brand content needs great JDs
|
||||
- **hr-interview-designer**: Pipeline candidates skip early screening rounds
|
||||
- **hr-offer-architect**: Pipeline relationships speed up offer-to-close
|
||||
- **hr-culture-architect**: Culture is the foundation of employer brand
|
||||
- **hr-retention-radar**: Employee retention data informs hiring forecasts
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
- `memory/hr/hiring-forecast-[year].md` — Annual hiring plan by quarter
|
||||
- `memory/hr/pipeline-[department].md` — Department talent pipeline
|
||||
- `memory/hr/pipeline-metrics-[month].md` — Monthly pipeline analytics
|
||||
- `memory/hr/employer-brand-calendar.md` — Content and event schedule
|
||||
- `memory/hr/referral-tracking.md` — Employee referral program data
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user