Show HN: Non-technical founder MVP = Hustlebee(hustlebee.com)
hustlebee.com
Show HN: Non-technical founder MVP = Hustlebee
http://www.hustlebee.com
25 comments
The site was inspired by iwannaworkatinstagram.com. I want to build a recruiting tool that makes it easier for people to get hired by companies that they're really passionate about working for. Check the blog at http://www.hustlebee.posterous.com for more on my journey and where I'd like to go with this.
To be brutally honest, your product makes no sense to me and I have reservations about the problem it is solving actually being a problem.
It's defining hook, that people using it must accept any job offer, is outlandish. On further inspection I can use Hustlebee to submit applications to multiple companies. Doesn't that make the promise of more dedicated employee leads empty? Why doesn't it at least check the email address to allow only one submission?
If you decide to go back to the drawing board you need to re-examine your views of the job market. There are many more potential employees than there are employers, that is why people apply for multiple jobs at the same time. It really isn't that big of a deal to a company when they extend and offer and it is turned down. Essentially, you are solving the wrong side of the problem here.
It's defining hook, that people using it must accept any job offer, is outlandish. On further inspection I can use Hustlebee to submit applications to multiple companies. Doesn't that make the promise of more dedicated employee leads empty? Why doesn't it at least check the email address to allow only one submission?
If you decide to go back to the drawing board you need to re-examine your views of the job market. There are many more potential employees than there are employers, that is why people apply for multiple jobs at the same time. It really isn't that big of a deal to a company when they extend and offer and it is turned down. Essentially, you are solving the wrong side of the problem here.
I'd love to hear more about the trials and tribulations of mvp'ing your product as a non-technical founder... and it would be cool to see some background as just how non-technical you are :)
One small suggestion: You have a required field that's only has one checkbox option. This is weird to me from a UX point of view. It's also a weird question. I think what you're trying to do is find out if the user is serious about their application or not...
One small suggestion: You have a required field that's only has one checkbox option. This is weird to me from a UX point of view. It's also a weird question. I think what you're trying to do is find out if the user is serious about their application or not...
Yeah definitely the next blog post will be about how I launched the page/what I'm using in terms of tech. I am probably as non-technical as they get...I've been reading HN for a while now but have done no db programming before and my skills are limited to front-end stuff (read the blog post at http://www.hustlebee.posterous.com if you want to know more about my background).
Re: the required field, the goal of the site is to have people commit to take the position upfront. This is what makes it valuable because it allows companies to cut down on time spent trying to gauge how committed their applicants are.
Thanks for the feedback!
Re: the required field, the goal of the site is to have people commit to take the position upfront. This is what makes it valuable because it allows companies to cut down on time spent trying to gauge how committed their applicants are.
Thanks for the feedback!
No sane person is going to agree to take a position without seeing the terms first. Working for hustlebee might be my dream job but if I were offered $0.50/hr then you could probably imagine what my response would be. No check box on a recruiters sign up page is going to change that. More importantly it's almost certainly not binding and so the applicants have no reason to not check the box. If I were launching this site I'd be more worried about how this would hurt the number of people that take you seriously. Going back to the first point, if I'm not going to agree to accept a job without seeing the terms I'm also not going to work with a recruiter that requires me to accept any potential offer.
> No sane person is going to agree to take a position without seeing the terms first
Quite. I list a few obvious reasons why a candidate wont want to take a job in a thread above - but this is not to mention the Service Agreement / Employment Contract which could be pages and pages of detailed legalese and, particularily with startups, could have lots of contentious stuff with stock options and so on.
Having your USP as "the candidate promises to accept your job offer" is unreasonable, unrealistic, impractical and most likely unlawful.
Quite. I list a few obvious reasons why a candidate wont want to take a job in a thread above - but this is not to mention the Service Agreement / Employment Contract which could be pages and pages of detailed legalese and, particularily with startups, could have lots of contentious stuff with stock options and so on.
Having your USP as "the candidate promises to accept your job offer" is unreasonable, unrealistic, impractical and most likely unlawful.
Agreed.
There's a lot of room for disruption in recruiting as many agencies/recruiters have poor/unethical practices. Unfortunately this misses the mark for me as an employer and would scare me away if I were looking for work as an unreasonable requirement.
There's a lot of room for disruption in recruiting as many agencies/recruiters have poor/unethical practices. Unfortunately this misses the mark for me as an employer and would scare me away if I were looking for work as an unreasonable requirement.
Have you talked with anyone of the companies on your site about whether the problem your site solves is in fact a problem for them?
If not, and you are still committed to finding product-market fit, perhaps their feedback would be helpful as you refocus on a different problem.
If not, and you are still committed to finding product-market fit, perhaps their feedback would be helpful as you refocus on a different problem.
I think you may have accidentally left Working Software off the list. Easy mistake to make.
So what happens if this takes off and you get 10 / 100 / 1000 seekers for a job at X?
Is it on Hustlebee to pre-qualify? Are you now a technical recruiter taking some % of the annual salary for the first 6/12 months?
Why is hustlebee better than applying directly?
You only place designers/engineers? Even if the company has other openings?
Can you have a page that shows all the opening from that drop-down of companies in one place?
Is it on Hustlebee to pre-qualify? Are you now a technical recruiter taking some % of the annual salary for the first 6/12 months?
Why is hustlebee better than applying directly?
You only place designers/engineers? Even if the company has other openings?
Can you have a page that shows all the opening from that drop-down of companies in one place?
1) I'll be sending applications to companies and they can choose whether or not to interview candidates.
2) I haven't figured out specifics but I'll probably charge companies that successfully make hires through us something similar to what they'd pay via employee referrals.
3) Hustlebee is better than applying directly because companies will treat you as a more serious candidate (just like if you were to create a website dedicated to why you want to work for a company). This streamlines the process for people that REALLY want to work for a company and cuts down on the number of applicants that companies need to vet and the number of companies that people need to apply to.
4) I decided to start with designers/engineers because those appear to be the positions in highest demand right now. I may expand to other positions later but haven't yet decided exactly how I'll go about doing that.
5) I'll try to do this.
2) I haven't figured out specifics but I'll probably charge companies that successfully make hires through us something similar to what they'd pay via employee referrals.
3) Hustlebee is better than applying directly because companies will treat you as a more serious candidate (just like if you were to create a website dedicated to why you want to work for a company). This streamlines the process for people that REALLY want to work for a company and cuts down on the number of applicants that companies need to vet and the number of companies that people need to apply to.
4) I decided to start with designers/engineers because those appear to be the positions in highest demand right now. I may expand to other positions later but haven't yet decided exactly how I'll go about doing that.
5) I'll try to do this.
Not sure I follow your reasoning for #3. Filling out this form seems to be the absolute least someone can do if they really want to work at a particular company.
I think taking 5 minutes to find someone at the company and emailing them a personal email will be way more successful for a candidate.
Plus I'd worry that you will sound like just another recruiter when presenting me to the company, so it may end up hurting my chances.
I think taking 5 minutes to find someone at the company and emailing them a personal email will be way more successful for a candidate.
Plus I'd worry that you will sound like just another recruiter when presenting me to the company, so it may end up hurting my chances.
3) Why? All I've got to do is fill out your very simple form. Hardly the same as building a dedicated site targeting a particular company, and no harder than just applying directly. If anything it's easier: no CV, no covering letter etc.
I would add that it does nothing to help determine if the candidate is qualified which is the larger hurdle for most companies than attracting job applicants. This doesn't address that point at all.
Because if you apply to a company through us, are accepted, and don't go through with it we won't allow you to apply to other companies through us. This makes it so that companies can actually trust the service to get committed candidates as opposed to just candidates who, if they applied via a similar service that was listed directly on the site, had no recourse if they didn't go through with the position.
That's completely absurd. There could be a 1,000 very legitimate reasons why even a serious or committed candidate will not want to accept an offer: the pay's not right, the role isn't quite right, there's not enough responsibility (or too much) he doesn't think there's sufficient opportunity for career progression, he doesn't like his prospective boss or team, they want you to work in a different location, or travel a lot, or travel too little etc etc etc etc.
A job interview is not a one-way street. It's about discovery and due diligence. It's perfectly acceptable for either side to pull put if they feel that for whatever reason the other side isn't a good fit. And neither side can be sure of a fit until they enter discussions.
You'll just end up shooting yourself in the foot and ditching great candidates: bad for you, and bad for your clients.
A job interview is not a one-way street. It's about discovery and due diligence. It's perfectly acceptable for either side to pull put if they feel that for whatever reason the other side isn't a good fit. And neither side can be sure of a fit until they enter discussions.
You'll just end up shooting yourself in the foot and ditching great candidates: bad for you, and bad for your clients.
The idea is that some people can figure out most of this before applying and, for those people, hustlebee will simplify the process significantly. I don't expect that everyone will apply to jobs via us but I hope that we can provide a channel for those candidates who are extremely committed to a position to get an employer's attention without having to do the recruiting dance.
But that's my point. Your form doesn't do any filtering at all. Anyone can submit/apply. Any submissions you get you're going to have no idea as to how reputable/qualified/credible that candidate is. So how are you going to know who to put forward to these firms?
You're most likely going to end up having to trawl through millions of applications with no data/info on which to judge them.
You're most likely going to end up having to trawl through millions of applications with no data/info on which to judge them.
Some people might be able to figure this out before applying but most probably wouldn't as a lot of that type of information isn't publicly available. More importantly, if I can figure out what compensation (equity/salary), travel, work, etc that I can expect from an employer then what in the world do I need hustlebee for? If I've determined all of those things I've probably been in contact with the company already and would be best served by applying directly rather than having some percentage of my potential compensation funneled off to a recruiter.
I'm also confused as to how this will "get an employer's attention without having to do the recruiting dance." This is pretty much exactly what it's like working with any recruiter. You submit your information to the recruiter, the recruiter contacts companies for you or tells you want available jobs there are and then contacts those you are interested in. From the employers side you have relationships with recruiters who send you over resumes and CV's that are supposedly filtered by relevance and qualifications.
Could you clarify why you feel you offer some benefit over other recruiters to both those looking for work and those looking for employees? So far it seems like you are collecting less information and not doing a skills match which is less than most recruiters I've gotten applicants from have done. For the employee you are saying that you just send on the application. Where is the added value outside of the "I'll accept an offer if I get one" checkbox?
I'm also confused as to how this will "get an employer's attention without having to do the recruiting dance." This is pretty much exactly what it's like working with any recruiter. You submit your information to the recruiter, the recruiter contacts companies for you or tells you want available jobs there are and then contacts those you are interested in. From the employers side you have relationships with recruiters who send you over resumes and CV's that are supposedly filtered by relevance and qualifications.
Could you clarify why you feel you offer some benefit over other recruiters to both those looking for work and those looking for employees? So far it seems like you are collecting less information and not doing a skills match which is less than most recruiters I've gotten applicants from have done. For the employee you are saying that you just send on the application. Where is the added value outside of the "I'll accept an offer if I get one" checkbox?
How many companies are extending offers and having them turned down?
I have not heard of this being a problem at any company ever.
I have not heard of this being a problem at any company ever.
From personal experience I would say #3 is a myth. It's reasonable for "success" stories to emerge more often that "failures" not because there are more but because people don't like to talk about it after they failed.
Great idea. I definitely see potential in what you're doing. Why did you only include YC companies?
I wanted to start with startups because they have the most difficulty finding candidates and have the least resources in terms of recruiters/HR/etc to help. YC has a great list of awesome startups so I figured they would be a good jumping off point. I may expand later but I'm not sure how/when that will happen.