Artsy Engineering Radio

Another Hiring Episode - Artsy's Secret Sauce

March 17, 2022 Season 2 Episode 8
Artsy Engineering Radio
Another Hiring Episode - Artsy's Secret Sauce
Show Notes Transcript

Steve Hicks talks with Emily Marmoy-Haynes and Saj Rasul about Artsy's secret sauce to hiring -- the reference check! They dig into how Artsy uses these calls to identify the strongest candidates without subjecting them to excruciating tests.

Steve Hicks:

Hey friends, welcome to another episode of Artsy Engineering Radio. I'm really excited about this episode. I'm Steve, your host, Steve Hicks. You've heard my voice before. But I have a couple guests with me. And this is another... I wouldn't call it a series. But it's a discussion that we've had a couple times on this podcast and on our blog, and I'm just excited to continue the conversation on hiring with a couple of people who are going to be able to share a whole lot of details about how we dig into reference checks with candidates. So I have with me, Saj and Emily. Emily, would you like to introduce yourself?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, sure. Thanks for having me on the podcast. So I'm Emily. I'm the team lead for talent acquisition for our PDDE team. And I'm based in Berlin.

Steve Hicks:

Excellent. And Saj, how about you?

Saj Rasul:

I'm Saj, I work in London, and I work predominantly in AMP at the moment, but I do some work across PDDE as well.

Steve Hicks:

Could you give me a quick like summary of what AMP is? And PDDE.

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

PDDE, I can take it. It's Product, Data, Design and Engineering. So it's the org that I'm responsible for recruiting for and the org that you're part of.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah, that's right. And then how about AMP.

Saj Rasul:

So that's Art Marketplaces. This covers things around, you know, secondary markets, it could be cross region as well. So EMEA, EPAC, as well as new kind of primary market of US as well.

Steve Hicks:

Excellent, thank you. I just like doing that for people who don't know what those things are. Okay, so I want to do a really quick recap of what we've talked about on this show. And then also in our engineering blog, regarding hiring. I'm personally approaching this from the perspective of hiring engineers, because that's who I am. And that's like, what I'm familiar with. But please, where there's opportunities to spin it in the direction away from engineers more universally, or whatever, I'm very open to that idea. But what we talked about so far is Artsy doesn't really hire people, and engineers the way that most companies hire them. We have standard interviews across all our interviewers, and the interviewers are all well trained with the idea of we want to make sure that every candidate has the same experience. And we're not introducing biases from one particular interviewer. We don't do take home assignments. We don't do high pressure whiteboarding, no code tests or someone standing over your shoulder while you're trying to code something. And this is I think, the most interesting thing about the way Artsy interviews because I think that this is present, at least for engineers, in just about every interview that they do at other companies. And the reason that we don't do these things is (my understanding) is that I think we're less interested in how they perform in those high pressure situations. And we're way more interested in how they communicate both technical and non technical ideas, how they can collaborate, because everybody at Artsy works on a team. And we work together and we want to make sure that we can collaborate together on stuff, and then also their ability to learn and grow. And, you know, the future that they have. Is there anything that either of you would add to any of those things that I've said?

Saj Rasul:

I would agree with you that it's definitely a unique process. And I think it's very effective as well.

Steve Hicks:

I agree. And I think that's why I want to have this conversation is because the majority of people I've talked to who interview other places that have these high pressure situations in them. It's because they want to filter out certain people or they want to select for a certain type of person. It doesn't always work the way that they think it works. But yet, we have incredible talent at Artsy like it's the most talented engineering org I've worked for. So obviously, it can be done without these types of excruciating interviews. And when it comes down to it, I think like the special sauce that we've talked about in the past is, we have these reference calls that we do, which are pretty intense, quite honestly, for the references that we're talking to you. And generally, when we talk about it on this show, and it's because it's like two engineers talking about it, it's kind of black box to us, and a mystery. And so that's why I want both of you here to tell me all about it. So maybe we can start with what these reference calls even look like. Like, what questions do we ask? And maybe what answers we look for? Emily, do you want to start here?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, sure. Good question. And hopefully, we can shed some light on this sort of references are, I guess to start with, it's usually about a 15 minute call. And that's either with one of us from the recruitment team, but it could also be the hiring manager for the role. So we try and split them between us based on diaries. We don't want to slow things down. So everyone jumps in there. I mean, I'm just thinking, Can we give away our secrets? Can we give away the exact questions, but generally, we designed the reference calls to understand more about how that person has worked in the past. So that we can build this 360 view of the candidate based on their interviews with us with the team, with the hiring manager and getting that external feedback from close collaborators. So I guess the themes that we ask around are really around strengths, times where candidates have exceeded expectations, their reliability, their performance, both from a technical perspective, but also from a, like a team perspective, how do they get on with others in the team? And very importantly, attitude to feedback.

Steve Hicks:

Saj, do you have thoughts about this?

Saj Rasul:

Yeah, absolutely. Just to add to what Emily said, there, I think that it's most definitely looking to build a well rounded picture of the candidate as possible. I've got to say Artsy, is probably the only place I've worked at that conducts references in this way. Whereas in most organisations, the reference calls would just be focused on confirming the duration that you were part of that company. And you know, what your job title was? I think that incorporating the reference call into the process as we do, it helps kind of approve decisions that been made in the hiring process so far. It can confirm areas that overlap and kind of raise new questions sometimes, you know. An example of this would be you know, we've requested specific referees for a reason, you know, colleagues you've worked with or people you've reported into, because of the in depth answers, they'd be able to give about how they work with you and what some situations may have looked like.

Steve Hicks:

Or there may be some specifics we could give in terms of the answers that we look for to these questions? Maybe examples of like when somebody is, you know, has answered it really well, or when someone has not answered them well? Saj do you have thoughts here?

Saj Rasul:

Yeah, absolutely. So the questions are really designed as a framework. When we talk to referees, it's usually trying to extract answers, which aren't just going to be you know, binary answers. We're looking to have a little bit more alignment on the thoughts we've had during the interview process. So a good example of that would be, we're not trying to ask leading questions, you know, how was this person? Great, you know, that lead to a very biassed answer? You know, it's more like, how have you witnessed working around this individual in a particularly stressful situation? Or, you know, was there a project which, you know, which had a deadline, which you couldn't meet? And how was it? How was it handled, you know, within the team? And specifically, how did you work alongside candidate X when resolving the issues? So the questions are designed to be more specific, more situation specific. And oftentimes, we come away with very, very full answers in terms of what we're covering.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah, it's interesting, because these are feel like questions that I've definitely been asked in an interview as the person as the actual candidate. But it's fun to ask the questions I imagine of people who aren't the candidate because you get a lot of insight into maybe how they answer it, maybe how they don't answer it, or how the candidate would or wouldn't answer it. But it's coming from a third party, which seems like a really good way to to really suss out the truth. Emily, do you have other thoughts about answers that we look for are examples where this kind of thing is successful?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, definitely, I think we don't look for a specific answer. As such, from a sort of reference. I think ultimately, you know, how we view references, having the three contacts, having the whole interview process, and like building a full picture of the candidate is what's most helpful. I think sometimes the reference calls can confirm things that we already discussed and know. Of course, sometimes they identify new information. But maybe my favourite example is when we've had recently a couple of candidates who have been particularly modest or sort of really undersold themselves, maybe they don't think they're quite at a senior engineer level yet. But we've kind of observed very thoroughly through our process, that they are a senior at Artsy, and then we've spoken to the reference who have said the most amazing things about their leadership skills, the responsibility they take and given us loads of examples of projects and where they've done this, how humble the person is. And so I always find this particularly nice, kind of cool, when that just confirms the things that we've identified very thoroughly. And you actually bring that candidate in at the right level, particularly when people sort of downplay their expertise.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah, that's cool. That feels like a nice little safety net for I mean, for myself, who tends to talk down on myself quite a bit to know that that would be there to catch that. So I am pretty sure that humility isn't a specific trait we hire for, but are there specific traits or skills that we hire for that are surfaced or not surfaced by this?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

I think the most obvious things that come to mind are like proactivity, good communication skills, teamwork, just sort of how people get stuck in and help on different projects or issues that particular company is facing. So for me, they're probably the most common traits that come up. What do you think Saj?

Saj Rasul:

What I found is a common theme. Yeah, it's less focused on Say for example, can you give me an example of a specific project where they did X, Y, and Z, because the duration of time since they've worked with this particular person could have been, you know, multiple years. So I find the answers generally invoke a response, which is a positive situation or a positive impact that was felt across the team, because of this individual being there. And, you know, although they may not recall the exact details, they remember that they came away feeling impressed, or they came away feeling that this individual was well up to the challenge and well up to the task and performed above and beyond in some situations, and, you know, it's those kinds of memories you want to recall from from the referee. And if they can drill down into specific examples, all the better. But generally, that's how I find, yeah, I find the conversation flows.

Steve Hicks:

Cool. Okay, I think we said earlier that it was about 15 minutes for each for each of these calls. One of the things that I've been wondering about this is when I got hired at Artsy, and I talked to the people that I had given as references, and they told me how intense the reference calls were. The question I had was, do we ever feel bad about how much effort and energy we're expecting out of the person who's not even applying? Like this is, yes, it's someone who's important to the process for us, but 15 minutes can be a lot of time, for someone who's not looking for this job. Do we ever feel like that's a lot? Saj, do you have thoughts about that?

Saj Rasul:

So I think that 15 minutes is expected. And I think we always give a heads up in terms of you know, we'll need this much time out of your day, please schedule a point, which is convenient. So we always give the option to the individual to select times, which are best suited. I tried to set it up as well, at the beginning of the call, I sometimes like to talk a lot. So I always preface it with you know, 15 to 20 minutes, maybe a bit at a time at the end if you have any questions. So with regards to setting expectations, that's all that matters. You could you could take 15 minutes, or you could take 30 minutes, as long as they know what you're going into, then, yeah, all sides can time can be respected properly.

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, I guess to sort of add to that, I try to like Saj set the expectations up front of like, We're incredibly grateful for your time. This is why we're doing the reference call. Do they need context from us about the role of the persons interviewing for what we do Artsy, to sort of help make them feel more comfortable answering the questions that we have. I always do tell the people that I'm doing reference calls with like, it's you should be about 15-20 minutes, but it depends how much you have to say, right? So I've had calls that were just barely 10 minutes. And I've had one that was 30 minutes long, because the individual had a lot that they wanted to get across. I think it's relatively standard practice, or it has been historically, in I think US and sort of culture in the UK, that you're, if you manage somebody, you're probably going to be asked for a reference at some point for them. And so I think just being clear about what we expect, telling candidates this upfront, like, if you get to the end of the process, we will be asking you for these references. So they can also give that heads up, tries to make it as sort of sensitive of somebody's time, but also doing what we need it to do at the same time.

Steve Hicks:

It's interesting that you say that it's maybe not a standard practice, but expected if you're managing someone that you should expect to, to give a reference. Looking back on the times that I've interviewed in the engineering space, it's been very few times that I've actually had to supply references. So that's another thing that I actually think is maybe a little bit unique to Artsy and cool, because rather than trying to get information about a person, in the 45 minutes that you sit down and watch them code, you're actually talking to somebody who has like years of experience working with them and has a lot more insight into it. Okay, I guess I just want to circle back a little bit. There's one more thing that I really wanted to talk about in regards to what the call looks like. And when it goes well, when it doesn't. Have we maybe talked about what a very unsuccessful call looks like, Emily?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, I can answer. I mean, I guess for me, when I've had a less successful reference call has been that it's been very brief. So the person has said, "Oh, we didn't really work together much on that topic", or "I can't answer this question". And so you end up having finished a call very quickly and didn't really learn that much from that person. So it's just not as reliable. Obviously, another way it could be bad as if someone surfaces a concern around teamwork or unreliability the quality of some of these worker communications. And obviously, that's something that we want to make sure like, we look into does that come up in other references? Or does that has that come up during the interviews? So yeah, I think the other thing that we should be aware of like we're very international at Artsy. We have offices, we're all based in a different location right now. And a lot of the people we hire are also coming from loads of different places from all over the world. And so the other time I've had a slightly less successful reference call was when we didn't speak a common language. And we were actually trying to do the reference call via sort of Google Translate and speaking in sort of part English part other languages to try and sort of account for that international element. So it's not necessarily a bad reference call. It's just we struggled to perhaps communicate that there.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah, that's a tough one. Saj, do you have any thoughts about this?

Saj Rasul:

Yes, certainly. I think it comes back to the reasons we're asking for specific references in the first place, like, you know, for different levels of role it would be, you know, for example, someone who reported into you or someone you worked alongside, or something you yourself reported into. It varies based on the candidate where we're interviewing. I think that the hardest calls are the ones where, as Emily said, you know, it's difficult to extract information. So, going into it with more of a conversational tone, setting the scene, it all helps to kind of ease the referee into the situation. So, for example, when we ask a candidate for a reference, we just ask them for a brief one liner - who was this person to you? Right? So it gives us it gives us something to go into the call with, and setting that up in at the beginning of the call, and kind of suggesting, you know, this is the end of our process, we're thrilled to have interviewed the candidate, we'd love to hear your thoughts. You know, over the next 15 minutes, I'm just gonna run through a few questions with you if that's okay. And I guess it all depends on, you might be really unlucky and run into those people who just give you one word answers, you know, you might run into those people who are very dismissive of you, if you kind of spending time with them. But that's fine. You know, it happens, I've not run into someone yet who has been overly negative. So going into the call, it's a positive call, it's kind of, you know, it's enthusiastic, they're going to share with you only positive things, areas of development that they felt were worth noting as well. So overall, it's a positive conversation, I've yet to run into extremely difficult one. So yeah, fingers crossed, that doesn't happen.

Steve Hicks:

This idea of one word answers and very brief calls makes me feel like the reason that would happen for me as a candidate is if I gave you the name of someone who was like a friend that I worked with, and not really someone who I worked with a whole lot. But they would, you know, I knew that they would say nice things about me, but maybe not be able to go into too much depth. I do think that we give candidates a little bit of context on what kind of person they should provide as a reference. Is there more we can say about that, about who they should be suggesting?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, it's, I guess, that's probably like, the easy part of the references. And as Saj said, we do tell the candidate like who we want to speak to. So usually, we ask for three references, who are a mix of close collaborators. So usually, I would say, doesn't matter what role you're entering for, we would always want a peer of you, whether that's the current company, or a past company, and a former manager. If it's a leadership role, then yes, as Saj said a direct report, you know, perhaps other collaborators there. So we're also here to help. So if a candidate says, you know, I've only spent my professional career at one company, I'm four years in, I can't tell them that I'm leaving, but who do I give us a reference? We're here to help guide candidates with that. So we can work out, you know, was there a close collaborator who's moved on from the company or someone that we can talk to that actually can give relevant context about you. And it's not just a friend, as you say, but is not going to cause some difficulty in the current job.

Saj Rasul:

Just to add one more thing there, I guess what a what a good reference call looks like versus a bad reference call. I would say that having had the feedback from our interviewers, having the scorecards open, and seeing the common theme, the thread that kind of goes through every scorecard and the things that the references discussing with you. Yeah, seeing those themes kind of match up is quite fulfilling, actually, from a interview perspective, because we can see that we've got to this point, because we've identified the candidate as having these traits. It's all being kind of confirmed on this side. Now at the reference stage, seeing those two things come together, you kind of get this, you know, this was a good process. This was a good reference call. Everything's coming together. We've identified what we need to and it's been confirmed. So that's, that's kind of the best case scenario.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah, that makes sense. Getting that alignment and getting that kind of confirmation as opposed to something that I imagine is really frustrating when we get one story from the candidate and then kind of a different story from one reference and then a different story from the third. And now that seems like it can be really confusing. Okay, so I'm a candidate, I've made it through interviews at Artsy. I've given you my references, you've talked to them. I'm excited about working at Artsy. How much stock do I expect you to put in the the interviews that I did versus these reference calls? Emily, do you have thoughts about this?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, I mean, I would say references don't have the same weighting as an interview. So ultimately, if you've performed very well through our interview process, we've identified those sort of skills and sort of traits that we're looking for, for someone to be successful at Artsy. Having one reference that maybe says, "Oh, when we work together three years ago, this one thing happened", that's not going to damage somebody chances of joining. So I would say at the very end of our process, what happens is the hiring manager goes through the feedback of every single interviewer in quite a lot of detail often, like we have debriefs as a group or the hiring manager will discuss that one to one with the interviewers to make sure that we're really clear on our process. And you know, what we've uncovered, and the reference calls, so the hiring manager sort of looks at everything. And then from that would make a decision if they want to offer the candidate the role. It's not sort of one or the other role, sort of waiting there.

Saj Rasul:

Yeah, just to just to kind of reiterate that absolutely. It's not, it's not that one would have more weighting than the other. But together, it builds a very surefooted picture about should we consider this candidate? And "Should we consider making an offer", versus, "Do we have additional questions that we may want to revisit". A hiring manager may take all of the feedback into consideration at the very end of the process and decide, you know, what, I've changed my mind based on what I've seen at the reference stage. Whereas it started off overly, you know, it could have started off overly negative, and it's turned more positive throughout the process, given that, you know, the candidates shown exceptional answers to the questions and the references are confirmed and all. So it's very useful to kind of at the end of the process, take a step back as a hiring manager and go you know, what, I'm convinced this is worth pursuing. So it can be very useful from that perspective.

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

I think it's just like building the whole picture, isn't it? From you know, every single angle from you know, when you interview, you meet lots of peers at Artsy you meet the hiring manager, you meet sometimes executives, and then for us to get that insight from your close collaborators, you know, then we really get this big sort of picture.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah, I love that. It does seem like a lot of hiring teams outside of Artsy are really just taking that tiny slice. And I love that this gives us a more comprehensive view of the person. Okay, so I'm ready to move on to kind of the history of these calls. But before we do that, I just want to check, is there anything in regards to the actual, you know, the logistics of going through one of these checks that we didn't touch on that either of you want to catch? Saj, anything for you?

Saj Rasul:

I'm just going back through my answers. I think no, I think we've covered we've covered everything with examples that I really wanted to touch on. So no, I'm happy. I'm happy.

Steve Hicks:

Cool. How about you, Emily? Looks like you had something.

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, I was just thinking that with references like they're always recommended by the candidate, right, we don't go off and do secret reference calls. We don't just like phone, people the candidate worked with before, it's always a, Hey, who is going to be a reference, this is who we would like to talk to, and then the candidate gives us that information. And so I would say overwhelmingly, there is always a slight bias towards the reference being more positive than not, I think, I also see a bit of a cultural difference in like, say in the US versus like, what is acceptable to say or do in Europe. And so I think like in Germany, would we get this Arbeitszeugnis, which is like an employment certificate, that your HR team gives you a new lever, a job, and it's less common, that you're going to, like, do a reference call, whereas I think in the US, it's a little bit more, I say how it is, if the candidate was, you know, good in my team or not, or whatever the issue like it tends to be more sort of directly coming out. So I guess that's the only thing is that ultimately, the candidates pick who the references are going to be. If the reference hasn't worked with the candidate in the most recent years, I also think, you know, how much of this can we really rely on? Or how relevant if the candidates developed loads and progressed their career since they work together? So that's the only thing I'm kind of keeping in mind as well.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah. Is there any kind of rule you have in your head for what is too long ago to have worked with someone?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

We try to say the most recent couple of years, I guess. Within the last sort of two to three years, we have had situations where someone said, you know, I started my career, I've worked at a company for five years. These are the only people I can give you references with, like now or maybe, you know, I could give someone from university or a different type of perspective, I think it depends on the role and how senior that person is as to how flexible we can be on some of those references

Steve Hicks:

That makes sense. So let's talk about maybe the history a little bit. Emily, I think that you probably have more perspective here. How have these things changed over time at Artsy? Do we have plans to change them more in the future? Any thoughts about that?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, it's a really good question. So when I joined Artsy, just over a year ago, we were hiring a lot of engineers, and we were losing a lot of time, at the end of the process, kind of getting to a point of like, okay, these couple could be people that we want to bring on board. Now we need to ask the candidate for their reference, they would, especially in Germany, then need to go and check with the reference, send us the details, then we need to set the call off, and sometimes the candidate would have an offer, and we would actually be waiting, like for their reference to come back to us. So what we did is we started to expedite this process much earlier on. So for instance, if we have a few finalists moving to the end stage, we can already start the references, sort of ahead of time, so that we don't get those situations where someone's waiting, like too long to find out if they're going to references or for us to get hold of somebody. I guess the other thing is, as we started hiring for more leadership roles, we evolved some of the reference questions to actually reflect against that role. So around leadership management, one-to-one's, team culture, and feedback and stuff like that.

Steve Hicks:

Cool. Saj, do you have any thoughts about this?

Saj Rasul:

I've seen some changes, but nothing that I could say is significantly different from when I joined. I'd say that the changes I've seen are mostly reflected in the level of role. So who we would ask for in terms of a reference in the first place. But other than that I've not spent too much time in this part of the business so far.

Steve Hicks:

What about the future? What about, like, are there things that you'd change about it? Ways that you think that we could do things a little bit better?

Saj Rasul:

Yeah, absolutely. So I think, you know, that coming at this as a recruiter, there's no perfect hiring solution, as much as we wish there was. So constantly getting feedback constantly. Kind of, I guess, in a way A/B testing, you know, getting thoughts from our own current employees, you know, how would you kind of envision this working out, if you're looking for a job at Artsy and using that with candidates. Also, we want to stay competitive. So we want to know how candidates are finding our interview process and how they would kind of review it against other processes they've been through. So it's kind of building a much bigger picture. And I think that Artsy as a company would never be a place where we get bogged down in tradition, it wouldn't be like we're doing it this way because we've always done it this way. It would be constantly evolving, depending on what's best for the outcome.

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yeah, I guess just to add to that, like Saj said, we're very open always to feedback on our interviews, our process references, and so if we would take that feedback really from our candidates, our interviewers, our hiring managers, once somebody starts, you know, and they're like, part of then Artsy in the long term, like, is there anything we can look back on and sort of change? So we don't plan to make a specific change in future but we obviously are always agile and open to doing so.

Steve Hicks:

Yeah, definitely. I think that's pretty universal at Artsy. Okay, we're coming pretty close to the end here. I think maybe the last couple things I want to touch on are in regards to any advice that you have for other organisations? How can they do what we're doing, which works really well? Should they do what we're doing, et cetera? Emily, do you have thoughts?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Yes. Another very good question. I think generally, the feedback we get from our candidates is very positive in that, although it's a lengthy process, like they meet a lot of the team, there is that huge plus in that there's no homework, there's no live coding, there's no, like significant assessment, as you say, someone breathing sort of over your shoulder or having to spend a whole weekend on like mentally preparing for as well. So, of course, on the flip side, there's always going to be candidates that maybe prefer to do that. But I think my advice to other companies would be just listen to your candidates and the feedback that they're giving, like, always ask for that feedback. Be as agile and efficient as you can, in your process. Make sure each interview has a clear purpose is planned with the competencies like what are you assessing? What questions are we asking and why? So it's a very standardised process. And it's actually a benefit for candidates to meet those different people rather than just having, you know, seven of the same type of conversation, which is just, you know, not helpful from an interviewing perspective, but also a bit of a waste of the candidate's time. So that would be my advice I think more generally.

Saj Rasul:

Yeah, I would say that accountability is one of the biggest things that I've noticed. And what I mean by that, specifically in relation to hiring is that I've worked at companies where the ultimate decision maker would never get any pushback in the decision they're making. And I think that it's productive to have more than one person who's able to question a decision being made, especially when it comes to hiring someone. So at Artsy what I found is the hiring manager might say yes, but you know, because of levelling because of concerns about whether or not this person is aligned correctly to the role. And what we're asking them to do, you know, people ops might be able to push back and say, Well, hold on. This doesn't make make much kind of sense from what your original brief was. I've noticed that at other companies, that relationship between different departments is lesser. And for example, the CTO could say, I like this person, we're going to hire them anyway, let's put them through the process, but we're still going to hire them. You know, Artsy is very unique in that regard. And I'd say that other other companies should definitely take note and give equal hiring authority to different people, peers, and non-peers.

Steve Hicks:

Right, eliminate the biases. So I think we're ready to wrap this thing up. Is there anything that either of you would like to say that we haven't said, about this way that we hire people?

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

I guess the sort of final comments for me. Artsy is one of the most transparent companies that I've worked at with respect to hiring, we have so much information on our GitHub page, this podcast, or the other episodes, the blog, the contributions to the open source community. And I think this really reflects in our approach to hiring too. So candidates can get all of this information upfront, they know what to expect when they come and meet with us. And there's a lot of documentation out there to sort of refer back to. So I think our approach is pretty good. Glad to be part of the team. And my final comment is that we're hiring for engineering managers to join the team. So if you like what you hear, feel free to get in touch.

Steve Hicks:

I'll share that in the show notes.

Saj Rasul:

I just want to say thank you. Yeah, it's been it's been a very good experience, actually just airing some of this stuff. And, you know, having it presented in a constructive way, and I hope someone finds this helpful. Yeah. And just to kind of, you know, reiterate, Emily's plug that... Yeah, we are hiring.

Steve Hicks:

We've given you all you need in terms of how to succeed in those interviews. All right. Well, thank you both so much. The last thing I'd say is that I think Artsy is like the gold standard for hiring. Definitely the best experience I've had anywhere in my career, which has been very long. So thank you, Emily, thank you, Saj, for hanging out with me. It's been fun.

Emily Marmoy-Haynes:

Thank you.

Saj Rasul:

Thank you.

Steve Hicks:

See you later.

Saj Rasul:

Take care.

Steve Hicks:

Thanks for listening. You can follow us on Twitter - @artsyopensource. Keep up with our blog at artsy.github.io This episode was mixed and edited by Alex Higgins. And thank you Eve Essex for our theme music. You can find her on all major streaming platforms. Until next time, this is Artsy Engineering Radio.