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.
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.