Over the past 24 years, I’ve read thousands of resumes, interviewed hundreds of people, and hired across multiple companies. I thought I had a ton of experience — until I met Cecilia and Victoria. I’m in awe.
Why? Because Cecilia and Victoria are true experts at sourcing new team members. The other day, I did a quick calculation: between them, it’s easily over 40,000 interviews throughout their careers. That’s an incredible amount of experience.
And I’m not saying this because they are part of my team, but because I’ve seen firsthand how much hiring has changed over the past 24 months — more than it did in the previous 24 years. Hiring hasn’t gotten easier. Quite the opposite.
I think this is one of the biggest challenges small companies face today: finding the right people in a sea of opportunities. Getting hiring right determines the success of any business. Get it right, and the business grows. Get it wrong, and it stagnates.
Here are three timeless techniques Cecilia and Victoria use when interviewing candidates after scanning thousands of applications:
1. Details that hurt
Anyone can talk about wins. The real test is whether they can tell the story behind them in vivid detail — what really happened, who was involved, and what the friction was. They even ask small things like what the weather was like during a specific event to test authenticity.
2. Process over polish
They ask candidates to walk through how they did something, step by step. Real experience is a little messy. Made-up experience sounds like bullet points. They look for the small missteps and corrections that prove genuine experience.
3. The pause
Real memory makes people stop and think. Over-rehearsed answers don’t. When on a video interview, do the eyes move slightly as they recall, or do they stay fixed? That’s a subtle but powerful signal.
These are fundamentals in a hiring process that has only gotten more complex in recent months. But they remain the foundation — even in a world of a thousand resumes and AI-polished applications.
You Might also like
-
The Freedom Test: Can Your Business Run Without You?
I barely checked my email for the past two weeks and drastically reduced my workload. It’s summer, and I’ve been traveling through Europe. On my way to Bulgaria, I had breakfast with Janet Bell, who happened to be here as well. Janet and I have known each other for years, going back to our time in OPWIL (Office Products Women in Leadership).
Even though so much has changed around us, our connection was instant. We enjoyed coffee in the sun and talked about the changes AI is bringing to the office supply space.
That conversation reminded me of something I’ve come to appreciate deeply: as business owners, we need to build companies that can run without us. If my business can’t operate while I’m away, while I’m traveling, then it’s time to redesign the system.
Here’s what made that possible for me:
✔️ Delegation rooted in trust
✔️ Systems that carry the weight
✔️ People who show up and take ownershipIt sounds so obvious and even banal, yet it took me years to get right. And I see so many business owners who know this, yet still struggle to find the right people who allow them to let go.
This trip gave me gratitude for the freedom I’ve been able to build.
Post Views: 569 -
The “I Just Need Help” Moment
The “I Just Need Help” Moment
“I just need help.”
That’s what most founders say right before hiring.
It sounds logical.
It feels urgent.But urgency is rarely strategic.
Help reduces pressure.
It doesn’t reduce dependency.I’ve seen it repeatedly:
Founder overwhelmed.
Brings in support.
Six months later — still the bottleneck.Why?
Because tasks were delegated.
Authority wasn’t.If someone needs your approval to finish their work…
You didn’t solve the bottleneck.
You formalized it.Relief is emotional.
Leverage is structural.Before hiring, ask:
What outcome disappears from my responsibility permanently?If nothing disappears…
You didn’t scale.You expanded.
Where are you hiring for relief instead of redesign?
Post Views: 82 -
Remote didn’t create the problem. It revealed it.
Remote didn’t create the problem. It revealed it.
That’s what a founder told me.
So we looked at the structure.
No written decision rights.
No documented processes.
No defined response expectations.
No escalation framework.
Accountability wasn’t missing.
Clarity was.
When teams work in the same office, ambiguity hides.
People overhear conversations.
They interrupt each other.
Decisions happen informally.
Things move… even when the system is weak.
Remote work removes that safety net.
Silence exposes structure.
If ownership isn’t defined, work stalls.
If decision rights aren’t clear, everything escalates.
If processes aren’t written, people wait.
Remote didn’t create the problem.
It revealed it.
Strong companies don’t rely on proximity.
They rely on structure.
Decision rights travel.
Ownership travels.
Clarity travels.
And when they do, location stops mattering.
Quick question for founders running remote teams:
If someone new joined your team tomorrow, could they clearly see what they own and what they can decide — without asking you?
Or would they have to figure it out through Slack messages and meetings?
Structure is what makes remote work scale.
Post Views: 21

