Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Authentic, Authoritative, Unapologetic ServiceNow commentary by Cory "CJ" Wesley and Robert "The Duke" Fedoruk
Duke: Okay, and we are back, Corey
and I just, life got busy, man, I
switched jobs and I moved and all
this stuff and man, life got busy.
But the good news is Corey and I set a
CJ and the Duke record for deciding on
what topic we would talk about today.
So Corey, tell them what
we're going to talk about.
CJ: Man today, Duke.
And I agree with you, right?
Like we did set an all time
record on deciding on the topic.
today, Duke, we're going to talk about
how to hire a ServiceNow resource.
Duke: I think after 15 years,
people deserve to know.
CJ: You know, Duke, you would think
after 15 years, , that, this would
be something that's easy to do, but
I still find , it is tricky for many
people, even many people who have
hired ServiceNow resources previously.
Duke: Yeah, I think, a lot of people
do have the hang of it, ? But the real
trick is, if I'm hiring an expert in
something that I'm not an expert in,
, how does one even go about doing that?
And, even though all the time that's
gone by, I think , even various
recruiting companies, they just,
don't have the skill to figure out.
Is Does the walk match the talk?
CJ: Yeah.
I don't think that recruiters
are, talent vetting, , positions.
Though, I think we assume that they
should be, but there's no way, , because
you're hardly ever going to find
a recruiter that's just going to
specialize in one type of position.
Right.
I mean, you do find them, right?
There are some people who are only
like, we only hire ServiceNow resources.
This is what we do.
But given the turnover in the
recruiting space, it's really hard
to find folks who are in that niche.
And that's the only thing that they do.
So if you're hiring IT folks,
ServiceNow folks, SQL folks,
information security folks, right?
If you hire and all is that whole
gamut, If you're good enough to judge
the talent on all of those people,
maybe you should be on the other end,
Duke: Yeah, I do think there's a
misconception out there that is hopeless.
Like, if I don't have the technical
skill, I really do have to roll
the dice and on what I think, but
I don't think that's true anymore.
I think there's ways to ask
questions where you can.
You can kind of suss out whether they
know what they're talking about or
CJ: okay.
All right.
Duke: not.
So hopefully we'll take on some of that.
CJ: Yeah.
I think that's what the
people want to hear, right?
They want to hear how they can, as a non
expert find the experts so that their
projects and their teams can get better.
Duke: So my first piece of advice is, to
learn how to categorize the answer, right?
So are they talking about people?
Are they talking about processes or are
they talking about the tool specifically?
I think.
People can give very compelling answers,
talking about people and processes that
they've had exposure to as an alternative
to talking about areas of the product that
they should have demonstrated expertise.
Do you know what I mean?
CJ: Yes.
Duke: You can't help, but pay attention
to the specifics that are talking about,
but if you just take a deep breath and
just step back a little bit, and say,
but as good as the answer is, are they
talking about the tool or are they
talking about people and processes?
, CJ: you outline 3
different scenarios, right?
You got people, you got process,
you got the tool, right?
We'll call it product, right?
If we want to , get all profity and how
would you evaluate what the candidate is
saying based on each one of those buckets?
Duke: How would you about?
Okay.
I think that the skill
that is most in demand.
Is people who can build like, make it go.
CJ: Yeah.
. Duke: And so even if they're not
like a hardcore developer, they
might be on the implementation
side of the house where they just
need to know how the thing works.
You could spend a day in a workshop
talking about resource management and
SPM and not know a lick of JavaScript.
CJ: Yes,
Duke: you're still like technically
capable because that's a
complicated airplane to pilot,
CJ: man.
Seriously?
Duke: So If that's the most in
demand thing, and you're trying
to vet goods, does this person
really have the goods or what?
listen to if they're telling
you about the product or, I
don't want to say fooled, right?
Everybody's just trying
to do the best they can.
But, but if somebody is going in
the wrong direction, if I say, okay,
tell me about resource management.
Okay.
Your experience in resource management.
And they're talking about workshops that
they've done for resource management and
documentation they've made, or like how
they gathered requirements or something
like this, but they're not telling
you how resource management works.
CJ: Yep.
Duke: You know what I mean?
They're not, again, I don't want to
say like they're avoiding, right.
It's just like that
CJ: No, they,
Duke: but they're just, like, they
don't have the hard goods that you
want, or maybe you need to refocus them.
So I would say like, don't
be afraid to repeat yourself.
Tell them to stop back up.
Here's what I meant by the question.
CJ: yes.
Yeah.
When I'm talking to candidates,
, what I tell them is that they
have to know their audience.
. , and I think, is one of the , biggest
things, , when you're trying to get a
any job, especially a service now job.
Right?
So if I come on and I started asking you
questions about, very specific things.
Right.
Let's talk about business rules or let's
talk about how to build a custom app
or let's talk about, how flow works and
how can I call that from a script and
then, leverage integration hub to, run
an integration through the flow, right?
Like I start asking you
questions like that.
And you're talking about
workshops that you ran, right?
Like we're not on the same page
and you fail to realize like who
I am, in terms of the audience
that you're communicating with.
Because I'm clearly a technical,
, evaluator , in that role.
And you're speaking to me from
a different, , perspective, not
one that I'm looking to hear.
. And so there you disqualified immediately
anyway, and it's not, you might even be
able to speak to me in a technical way.
But the fact that you've failed to
understand that that's what I was asking
for, even though I'm being very clear
about it right to me, it shows a lot about
how engaged you are in the process, right?
And how engaged you might be
if I were to bring you on.
Duke: there's strategy one, make sure
that you're paying attention to the, type
of answer you're looking for and your
choices are technical people or process.
and you're probably the harder one.
That's the harder one, but the one
you're most likely going for is.
the technical.
This is really where the
rubber meets the road, right?
And where people are fearful,
like, I don't have the technical.
So how do I evaluate the technical?
I think the answer to that is to ask
them to tell stories where the technical
is a blank that needs to be filled.
You you can tell, right?
Like humans are great pattern
recognition machines, And so you can
tell if somebody's struggling and you
can tell if somebody's trying to like,
put the, pull the wool over your eyes,
CJ: Yeah.
Duke: you know what I mean?
So like examples of this would be
like, if you, especially if you're
looking for a developer, like, tell me
about a script include that you wrote.
CJ: And tell me how you use it.
, tell me where it fit in the instance.
. Tell me what you were doing with
it and why it needed to be a script
included instead of something else.
Duke: And somebody who hadn't done it.
And they're trying to answer anyway.
You would be able to tell, even
if you didn't know yourself, what
script includes we're all about.
CJ: I agree.
Right.
I think you would be able to tell
it enough, the flag that is a
potential for, a deeper dive.
Maybe that means, okay, this person
needs a level two screening, and
I need to actually send them to
someone who's more technical than me.
Or, this person actually doesn't
really have the goods that I'm looking
for, and I can tell because they're
struggling to even convey something
technical that they should know in a way
that makes me understand or makes me,
Duke: person, if they can succeed in this,
a person who's good at telling stories,
versus desperately trying to plug a
technical answer into a blank or a person
that can tell stories is de facto more
useful, all other things being equal.
Cause it, it hints at their
ability to communicate.
CJ: Yeah, I would agree that I
do think, you know, being able to
communicate is a prize skill, no
matter where you're trying to plug the
leak, ? Even if it's developer, if it's
an architect, even if it's a BA, it
doesn't really matter manager, right?
Like, you want that ability to
communicate and, someone who can do
that well is someone, in my opinion,
that bears a little bit more scrutiny
to understand if they meet the
other qualifications of the role.
Right.
. Duke: A few more examples in
this, ask them to tell stories.
So like, tell me about the hardest
technical challenge you had and how
you wound up solving it, or tell me
about the technical accomplishment
that you are most proud of.
And this is another way where you
kind of like do that step back and
monitor the category of the answer.
Right?
Because if they start talking about
how, political the situation was and
trying to get stakeholders across the
finish line, yeah, that's good and all.
But it's not talking about
the technical challenge,
CJ: right.
Duke: right?
A technical challenge would be something
like, Oh, we had to homebrew our own on
call scheduling system because fill in
the blank, the default, the out of the
box one wasn't good enough in this aspect.
Or, we had to integrate with
two systems simultaneously
for like e bonding solution.
You know what I mean?
That will sound technical.
And they will talk about the objects
that couldn't work, wouldn't work.
They needed extra research on.
CJ: Yep.
Yep.
Absolutely.
Duke: and you you don't have to be in
a position where of equal or better
technical capability, you could just say,
tell me a story and you'll know if it's
good enough or not, you'll just know.
CJ: I think, during the
storytelling phase, right?
It does give you good information on how
aligned this person is going to be , with
the, criteria that you have, right?
Because again, . It's about
knowing your audience and,
as you're asking questions, you're looking
to hear the person , tick boxes, right.
They relate to the questions that
you're asking in a certain way.
If you're asking technical questions,
you want to hear the answer sound
technical, . And, I would hesitate to
say that anyone like any non technical
person can do a technical screening.
Right?
Like, I don't believe that.
But I think that you don't necessarily
need to be like a standout tech
person in order to screen a tech.
I think you, if you have, a
base level knowledge of the
subject matter, then you can.
use your BS detector, right?
Like to kind of suss out if this
answer, passes mustard or not.
Duke: May we, should we
each give an example?
CJ: Yeah, no, go for it.
Duke: Okay.
technical challenge I had on service now.
I was doing a workflow for essentially
legal service management before there
was such a thing on service now, and
also before there was before Florida is
that floor designer, , flow designer.
Was,
CJ: I think we got one
of those now too, though.
Right,
, Duke: yeah, so it was, I think it was
either before flow designer was out or
before anybody was really good at it.
And.
, how this law practice figured
out what cases they would take.
I know the legal arena has a certain word
for it, but it was by far the most insane
approval process that I had ever seen.
And so it was basically like,
first you pick . Which approval
framework you had to have.
And there's like one of 15, let's say.
And then it wasn't just a simple,
like simple majority rules.
Like you had to weigh the approvals
of who, different lawyers who
would approve would have different
amounts of weight to the approval.
So it was very complex to find out
in any amount of approve, deny, or.
Didn't answer what was
actually a green light or not.
on top of it, just being very difficult
to just get your arms around, what
the heck do you guys even mean?
CJ: right,
Duke: Can anybody even draw this?
This is insane.
, so beyond that it
outclassed all of service.
Now it's kind of like out
of the box tools for it.
So I ended up having to build.
A three layered workflow, like a
workflow that ran a workflow that looped.
A different type of workflow.
So I had nested workflows.
Yeah.
I had to figure out a bunch of things.
I had to say like, how
do I nest workflows?
How do I make a workflow loop?
and then lastly, how do I pass
parameters between workflows?
Right.
All stuff that flow designers
just like, yeah, whatever.
It's super easy.
I said,
CJ: That was just, right.
Duke: Yeah.
And so that was, that, that, that
was extraordinarily difficult.
Cause I knew about workflow editor, But
I didn't know about nesting workflows.
I didn't know about parameterization
and I didn't know about workflow
loops, like kind of do this
until inside of a workflow.
Um, So, that's my example.
CJ: Gotcha.
, yeah, mine is, I had to build , an
integration for a client, , to
Microsoft team foundation server.
, but the client didn't actually have a
team foundation server dev environment.
And
Exactly, . So I had to, spin
up my own team foundation.
So now it just so happens to be
that I happened to be the perfect
person to do this for this client.
Because I have a Microsoft action
packs description, which gave me access
to Microsoft team foundation server.
Right?
And so I had a license.
Right?
And so I was able to install that on my
local computer, set up my own mid server,
connected up to my own, developer instance
and then build out like , the things,
and then obviously in an update said, but
build out, the requirements as they were
given to me , in the dev instance now.
That's still only get me
about 20 percent there, right?
Because they'd done some things with
theirs versus what I'd done with mine.
And so there were things, right?
Like, so there's stuff
that's in their environment.
That's not in mine.
And so I'm trying to represent that
as best way I can, try and, show.
Progress and validation
and all that kind of stuff.
. But in an environment that
is similar but unfamiliar for
them and so on and so forth.
And it was just a cluster.
And then the team foundation
server APIs were not great.
, the client didn't really understand how
they were using it very well either.
And there was , work items and all
kinds of like craziness and how they,
distinctions and how they were using it
versus, , how Microsoft intended for some
of this stuff to be used out of the box.
, and.
you put all of that stuff together and it
was just kind of like, yeah, I don't know.
I don't know where this is going
or how, we're going to get there.
we're just, and they're like,
yeah, just keep building.
It's looking good.
keep building.
I don't know that project
ever got to production.
Honestly, it was one of those really
weird things where they paid me
a considerable amount of money.
To build something that I don't think
that they ever actually ended up using.
I think there was a merger or something
and they ended up moving to some other
tool and they just scrapped all the deaf.
And
Duke: Brutal.
CJ: yeah,
Duke: those could be not,
not outcomes aside, right?
I love the work where it's
just, this is an experiment.
Everybody knows it's an experiment.
You know what I mean?
And it just kind of takes so much weight
off in terms of, are we building towards
requirements and has requirements changed?
It's just kind of like, can we do
something that turns A's into B's?
CJ: Yes.
Duke: You just kind of,
you know, I love those.
I love those kinds of jobs, man.
Love them.
CJ: Yeah, no, absolutely.
But I think, the thing is, right.
If I give, if anyone listens back
to both of those stories, . I think
that they would be able to say,
yeah, those guys seem like they
know what they're talking about.
. And whether or not we do always subject
to interpretation, but I think we could
pass, you know, we could pass a screening,
Duke: Yeah, I think it's one of those,
pattern recognition things, right?
Like if somebody could get through there,
like sounding technically competent.
And we'll fool you.
You know what I mean?
Like those people were
going to fool you anyway.
CJ: yeah,
Duke: Like they're a con artist, right?
It's just, and those people exist and
really good people get stymied by them.
So, but this is just to get you through
most of the, you know what I mean?
Most of the people that don't
have the, what you're looking for.
CJ: yeah.
And what I would even say is it's
probably to get you just to look
through the level one, right.
Of screening of this.
Right.
Because in my opinion, like in order
to still get to that, um, that place
where you have the person that you want
to hire, there's still more work to do.
Right.
Duke: So we talked about assessing
the category of their answer.
Then we talked about getting
them to tell stories, right?
Fill in the blank where
the blank is technical.
, now what we're going to do with the
last part of the show is we've got
a few questions that you can borrow.
It doesn't know if you
know the answers or not.
but.
Again, it'll be, one of those
things where the people will know
or they will not know, and it will
be very, very difficult to fake.
So one category of these is to say
things that are true, but get people
to explain the why behind them say
things that might not necessarily
be true and get them to audit you,
CJ: Oh, man, I love this.
I really love this.
it's like two lies and the truth, right?
Duke: so, , one, this is kind of
assumed true and then get them to auto
explain, what would tell you whether
you should make a flow or a sub flow?
Sure.
CJ: what would tell you that?
Right.
I mean, I, I know, you know, I know, but
I'm gonna ask you to answer it though.
Duke, since you asked the question,
Duke: Um, so, if you get the idea that one
or two of these actions are repeatable.
Especially if you're in a flow and you're
doing a four each and it's going to loop
through three or four, three, or I would
say any more than three actions in a
do this until, or in a four each, like
I would just consider pop, packing that
into a sub flow just for the readability.
And since I think Utah.
They've made that way easier.
Cause you could basically like click,
click, click, you could click three
of the actions in your flow and you
could just say, convert to subplot.
CJ: Yes.
Duke: it does it in an instant.
Now who could fake an answer like that?
You know,
CJ: yeah,
Duke: I gave insights about versions.
, I talked about the actual
mechanics of doing it.
And then I had a good idea about how and
CJ: yes, the completeness of your
answer lends itself to me evaluating
it to be true, Or at least evaluating
it to be on the right path to truth,
the truthiness of it is present, right?
Because the answer feels
complete and it also feels scoped
appropriately to the question.
Duke: Hmm.
Scoped appropriately.
I like that.
Yeah.
CJ: Yeah.
you know, another 1 would be like,
why is it generally a bad idea to add
fields to task or to the CMDB CI table?
When you ask a question like that.
You know, you might get a
couple of different answers.
Somebody might tell you, well,
it's not really a bad idea.
And then you say, okay, so explain
why you don't think is a bad idea.
Right?
Because
Duke: The explanation
is the critical part.
CJ: exactly.
Exactly.
Right?
So the question is a setup.
Because honestly, it could go either way.
I do think that, , there are some
cases where you should add the fields
to the task table or to the CMD.
Seem to be on the score CI table, right?
Like , there's some, times, right?
But you should be able to
explain that because those
times, could run out of control.
Like if you just added things willy
nilly, and if you feel like the answer
is no, I'd like to know why you think
it's no too, because again, there are
some times, but most of the time you
want to do, you don't add those things,
especially on tables that are as massive
as task and see them to BCI, right.
You want to add those things in
places where they know the fields
are going to be more relevant.
Cause there are different branches
of these tables that also have
different have sub branches, right?
And maybe, you know, you only
need it on a sub branch, right?
Like,
Duke: can't be understood how risky it is,
but I would like, I wouldn't say never.
Right.
Like I'd still, I still like daydream
about having a finance type field on
task to basically say this task is
associated with CapEx, OpEx or none.
And then you could basically
imagine All tasks being part
of a global cost framework.
Like do my incidents cost me anything?
And if so, is it a capitalized
thing or is an OpEx thing,
CJ: Oh, man, that's that's deep.
Duke: know, and you think about.
about audits.
So all the tasks that come out of GRC,
CJ: Yeah,
Duke: SPM, like projects, project
tasks, that's a mind screw, right?
Projects.
A lot of people think of projects
as being CapEx or OpEx, but you
can really think about project
tasks as being CapEx or OpEx too.
You can have OpEx expenses
in a CapEx project.
CJ: right.
Like, you know, and so like, right,
like, you start getting deep and you
start framing things that way and
say, huh, never thought about that.
That makes a lot of sense.
Right.
At the very least is 1 of
those things like, okay, all
right, you kind of get this.
I can tell you know, your
way around the system.
And I think that's important.
Yeah.
, it is one of those things when you
get deep into this thing and you start
having those conversations , with the
right people, and you start getting
answers like that, it's like, yeah, okay.
All right.
All right.
I can send you to the client
Duke: yeah, and there's all
kinds of other stuff like explain
when you would use a scope,
CJ: Ooh,
Duke: right?
CJ: Don't get me ranting
about scopes on here, man.
Duke: Yeah, that one's I mean that you
should get an answer from that if they
haven't if they don't have a good answer
That's a huge red flag since it's such a
like it's a controversial topic, right?
CJ: Yeah, if they
Duke: You're somewhere between there's
people out there who are legit like you
should do nothing outside of scope nothing
CJ: Yeah,
Duke: Right.
And then there's other people
who are like, gosh, there's
still stuff that scopes can't do.
CJ: I think if, like, when I asked
that question, if I don't get like,
any somewhere in that answer, like,
someone cursing scopes, because
there are way too many of them
and having to spread development
across so many of them is annoying.
If I don't get at least that part of
the answer to, then I feel like you
haven't been doing this long enough.
Duke: Yeah.
All that stuff's getting
better by the way.
Like a little birdie told me,
um,
CJ: Fair enough.
Duke: So let's rapid fire some more.
I would say like a great way to
test a dev is to ask them about
methods about ServiceNow APIs.
So if you don't know what an
API is, it's just like, it's
things built in JavaScript.
That ServiceNow can use versus
building your own thing.
Big, huge example is glide record, right?
So it's the, it's the ServiceNow
API for querying the database.
I think, well, I'm not a developer, right?
Like I'm not a developer's developer,
but that's how I explain it.
But I would say, don't ask them to
explain it, say something like, tell me
about two methods from glide record that
are not ad query and ad encoded query.
CJ: Yeah,
Duke: Cause that'll basically tell
you that they've explored it a bit.
Do
CJ: true, that's true because
those are both like the things that
immediately pop that pop to mind.
Right.
You know, I mean, I
Duke: you have any?
I know mine.
CJ: Yeah, you know, I, I got a few, right?
Like, you know, um, I'd say,
um, I'm drawing a blank.
See, you see, this is how
it, this is how it happens.
Duke: no, for sure.
Didn't know I was
interviewing for a job today.
CJ: like, what's going on here?
I thought I was co hosting a podcast.
I'm on, I'm on trial.
Duke: I would do like get roll count.
CJ: the one I was thinking about.
Duke: yeah.
add or condition.
Um,
CJ: that one.
Duke: yeah, yes.
One hard to wield.
my favorite is dot underscore next.
CJ: tell me about that one.
I never used that one.
Duke: Yeah, it's for it's for a
circumstance where you might have a
field on the table called next and you
still want to see if the glide record
object has a next like the function next.
Without confusing it of the field next.
CJ: Got it.
Okay.
Yeah.
I that, so that's, I'm gonna say
that that's bad architecture.
If you put a field next on your
table, knowing that, you know,
you could do a, uh, a.next.
That, that is,
Duke: Oh, you got me curious now on
whether ServiceNow did it because
they built a field called next.
CJ: I would, yeah.
Mm mm-Hmm.
. Yeah.
I mean, you know, you
know, do things happen
? Um.
Duke: my PDI here.
, CJ: I think one of the other
things that I'd probably ask, , do
you know the difference between
glide record and glide aggregate?
and tell me some of the
main differences, right?
Differences, right?
The pointed differences, right?
To which I would say, , glide
aggregate uses the database versus,
.
You know, glide record doing
the actual lookup, right?
So you get a performance benefit on,
, the glide aggregate if you're just
doing, , aggregated methods, right?
But also glide aggregate doesn't
allow you to do updates, right?
So, if you did get a record, set from
that and you want to do something to it.
You'd have to then to call a glide record,
query in order to actually do that.
And there's also some hacks, right?
Because glide aggregate allows you to do
grouping where glide record lookups don't.
And so, there's sometimes when you
might not actually want to count,
but you might just want to group
some records and then do something
to the, to those group records.
And so you want to chain both
of these things together.
And so those things, right?
Lynn, like if I start hearing
this stuff, like I know I'm
dealing with a rock star, right?
Like this, somebody who's been
around the block a little bit
Duke: especially if they do stuff
beyond just the whole like Add
aggregate and get aggregate.
CJ: yeah.
Duke: there's a function in there.
I just don't know it off the top of
my head right now, but it kind of
like aggregates, but only if it's
above a certain area to begin with.
Right.
So like if you said, get me the sum
of each of the groupings, but only
the sums that are over a hundred,
CJ: Oh,
Duke: like you can get glide
aggregate to do that in like one line.
CJ: What?
Duke: it's awesome.
Um, I have a YouTube video on it.
I'll go put it in the, I'll
put it in the description
CJ: you should, you should
definitely put that in description
below, but this is where, right.
When I was, um, acknowledging it,
uh, it was on the, , the keynote
panel talking about now assist.
Right.
You know, where I was, where I
lean heavily on, , now assist.
It's like, Yeah, I don't, I can't
remember all of the glide aggregate stuff.
I don't use it nearly enough,
but I remembers, right?
So it's like, I'm just gonna write this
thing out and let AI build this query for
me and glide aggregate because I can't,
, it's like you, like, whatever you just
said, , I've never even heard of that.
But now I got to watch your video
because I'm curious, , I think now
assist for me really come in handy
because there's so much stuff , that
I've learned and so much of it that
is not immediately accessible on RAM.
Right?
Like I kind of, you know, I flashed
it to the bio somewhere and trying
to find it as Sometimes difficult.
Let the AI do that.
Duke: We got a few more minutes.
You want to rapid fire some more
questions that you could ask people?
CJ: Yeah, no, absolutely.
One of the other things I love to
ask about is like, why should you not
use glide records in a client script?
Like a glide record query in a
Duke: Oh yeah.
Yeah.
Yep.
Definitely got to know that.
I think it, I don't know.
Does it, does it fully
restrict you from doing it now?
CJ: I think it does restrict
you from doing it now.
Um, you know, which is funny
because over time, right?
Like as long as we've
been in the game, right?
It's like, that used to
be a thing you could do.
and then, it became like,
Oh, you shouldn't do this.
And then it became, Oh, don't do this.
And then it became like, Oh, and
we're stopping you from doing this.
Duke: I got one.
CJ: Yeah.
Duke: what makes you decide to use a
catalog item over a record producer
since they both produce records?
CJ: Yeah.
That's a good question, right?
What I'd say is.
If you have something that it
was number of reasons, right.
But for me, one of the key reasons is
if I'm trying to just produce a record
that's on an existing table, right.
And I want the end user to be
able to input that data without
me having to walk them through it.
That's a record producer.
Right.
, if I'm trying to build a mini app, then
that's a client that's a catalog item.
. That's got a flow.
It's got defined delivery and execution
fulfillment, that sort of thing.
And it's going to be the
same thing every single time.
. That's it.
That's the cat log.
I don't
Duke: Can you use GS log in scope?
CJ: do.
Don't ask me about GS log.
I, I don't,
Duke: Whereas I like to call it GS what?
CJ: Yeah, my, , Immediately accessible,
, knowledge of how to log things in service.
Now stopped at somewhere around,
I don't know what Geneva and, so
whenever I, I have to do anything
that's like a complex login, I'm
going to Google to look it up first.
So I honestly, I have no fricking idea.
And I end up on your fricking video often.
Yeah.
Duke: answer GS log doesn't work in
scope or at least years ago, it didn't.
And that's when they started out with,
started doing the GS error info and worn.
So you use those inside of scope.
Um,
CJ: I write all of that,
but just give me the log.
I just want to, I just
want to see it in the log.
Why can't I just like, I've got to
remember all these freaking things.
Just give me just log everywhere.
I'm good.
Good old days.
All this change.
Get off my grass, man.
Get
Duke: if you're asking them about
methods and different in different
funk and different, , API.
So there's like, let's just list off some
of the API is like, tell me about methods
in glide record in glide aggregate in
glide system in G form in G user, right?
Those are five.
You can take to the bank.
They'll be in the description below.
But if you just ask people to
describe methods from there.
Right.
They either know or they don't know.
CJ: Yeah.
No, you're right.
You're absolutely right.
And you would like to be for them
to be able to tell you where.
Right.
And, and so another thing I want to,
point out too, . Is that if you're
a person asking these questions
and you're not technical, like you
should have an answer sheet too.
. Because they're going to add,
they're going to answer these
questions and you should have at
least some level of being able to
cross check for terms or something.
To be able to say, yeah,
no, this is all right.
You're on the right track.
Yeah.
Because some of this stuff, like,
you know, I don't expect that.
Random regular recruiter to know the
difference between G form and G user.
Yeah, um,
Duke: wow, that we're
like 37 minutes of record
CJ: Dude, it's crazy.
So one of the easiest, , methods , of
validating whether or not you're
hiring the right person is to hire
somebody like me to talk to them.
Duke: Good one.
Good one.
CJ: Right.
I mean, but I mean, that's
just kind of what it is, right?
At some point, depending on what level
of person you're looking to hire, it
makes sense to pay a little bit to make
sure that you're hiring the right person.
Because onboarding and offboarding
people is expensive, right?
Training folks is expensive.
All that time that you invest in somebody,
you get like through two months, right?
And then you're like, damn,
this is the wrong person.
And, sometimes if that's like an
architect, now your projects in danger,
like they might have made a whole bunch of
really bad decisions that you're going to
have to unwind or something or anything.
, one of the main things to figure out when
you're trying to figure out how to hire,
a service now person is, At what scale
at what level of impact does this person
have on the project or the team and then
right whether or not you can justify an
expert to actually help you screen this
person to at least give you a little
bit more comfort than what you might
otherwise have if you're not an expert.
Duke: Yes.
I think the whole thing is you have
to screen the person who you'd make,
who would make you feel comfortable
that they screen the right people.
but there is something to be kind of
like a freelance talent evaluator.
Right.
CJ: Is it?
Maybe it is now.
It is now.
Duke: Yeah.
No, I mean,
CJ: hanging out my shingle.
Duke: Yeah.
it's got huge upsides
CJ: Yeah, I would think so.
Duke: traditionally like, Oh, let's go
to a recruiter, they'll find something,
but the recruits have the same problem
you do is like, they don't have the
technical expertise to evaluate.
So if you want to be sure, and you want
somebody with deep tech chops, then just,
pay the, however much it takes, I mean,
the amount you'll pay to get a freelance.
vetted expert to vet the other experts is
going to be way less than the time you're
going to waste hoping, Or the risk of
not getting somebody who's good enough,
CJ: yes, the risk of not getting somebody
who is good enough, , because that person
can do a lot of damage before you realize
that they're not the right person.
And sometimes you, depending
on the client, depending on the
project, depending on the company,
depending on the team, right?
It can be hard to unwind, not only
the damage that that person does, but
also unwind them from the team, right?
Like some companies they
don't remove people quickly.
I say, is that the best way to put that?
Yeah, they don't remove
people quickly, right?
Like they're and so you get someone
embedded in the team and they're not
working out, but you've got to let that
kind of process play out long enough.
So that, , some arbitrary
person has waited some arbitrary
amount of time to then decide
that, this thing isn't working.
And so now you can get rid of them.
But how much productivity that
you lose during that time, right?
How much, , impact the team
morale , that you sacrifice, right?
And how many things do you technically
might have to unwind, right?
It's just, it's just something
that's not worth it, right?
It's definitely never, it's never
worth it to skimp on evaluation
when the evaluate, when the position
that you're , hiring for had a huge
impact on the success or failure of
either the project or the client.
Duke: well, we are at
41, 42 minutes of record.
CJ: Bloody hell, make
it enough for lost time?
Duke: yeah, so if he felt like this
is super informative and you feel
like you want some help maybe in
getting, , evaluating the talent that
you want building out your service.
Now, , we will have Corey's
information in the description below.
You can reach out to him.
And, hopefully Corey gives
me a little bit of color.
CJ: Drinks on me, buddy.
Drinks on me.
Duke: Put on my tab, right?
Alright, thanks for watching everyone,
we'll see you on the next one.
CJ: Later.
Duke: Still no outro.