0:01

Welcome to another episode of the Mapscaping

0:03

Podcast. My name is Daniel and this

0:05

is a podcast for the geospatial community.

0:08

So I've heard from a lot of different people that it's a pretty

0:10

tough job market at the moment. We've

0:12

seen a bunch of huge tech companies

0:15

fire a lot of employees. So

0:17

I thought maybe now would be a good time to get

0:19

Jet Metcalf on the show to talk about

0:21

recruitment. Jet is currently the head of talent at

0:24

Regrow Ag, but he was also

0:26

the recruiting manager at Descartes Labs

0:29

and had a similar role at Google. So I thought

0:31

Jet would be a really good person to get on the podcast today

0:33

and talk about applying for a job, getting

0:35

picked, and how to negotiate a contract. Just

0:37

before we get started, it's worth mentioning that if you enjoy

0:40

this episode or if this topic around

0:42

careers is important to you,

0:44

go to our website mapscaping.com

0:47

slash podcasts and there you can filter

0:49

the episodes by careers and hopefully

0:52

you'll find more episodes that will

0:54

be interesting and helpful for you. I'll

0:56

put a link to that in the show notes of this episode.

1:00

Hi Jet, welcome to the podcast. So

1:02

my understanding is you are the head of recruiting

1:04

at a company called Regrow Agriculture

1:07

and you've also got this long history within

1:10

geospatial recruiting specifically. And

1:12

this is what I'm really interested to talk

1:14

with you today about. But I think before

1:16

we get started, would you mind just introducing yourself

1:18

to the audience please and maybe let us know how

1:21

you got involved as a recruiter and specifically

1:23

as a recruiter within the geospatial

1:26

sector. Yeah, of course. And yeah, thanks

1:28

for having me, Daniel. And

1:29

yeah, you know, I maybe

1:31

I'll just start from the beginning. I really

1:34

I lucked out to

1:36

both find a career in

1:38

recruiting in the first place and then even

1:41

got more lucky to find a career

1:44

in recruiting in geospatial. So,

1:47

you know, I had started my career in recruiting,

1:50

mostly just working for, you know, staffing

1:52

solar fields and electricians

1:56

for construction projects, but

1:58

had a great opportunity to.

1:59

to take some time out at Google,

2:02

supporting their

2:03

masters and PhD recruiting

2:06

specifically. But through this, I

2:08

had actually supported one group in

2:10

particular, which is the GEO group

2:13

within Google, which runs

2:15

the mapping function, among

2:17

others. And around that time,

2:19

a small company had

2:22

just raised their Series B round of funding by

2:27

the name of Descartes Labs. And

2:29

coincidentally enough, Descartes Labs

2:32

was actually based where

2:34

I was from here in New Mexico, which

2:36

isn't exactly known as a tech hub

2:39

by any means. So I had

2:41

the opportunity to come right after our

2:43

Series B round

2:44

of funding when I knew that there was going to be

2:46

a lot of positions to be hiring for.

2:50

And I was with Descartes Labs for about four

2:52

and a half years from that Series

2:54

B round of funding, grew the company

2:57

beyond 100 employees, mixture

2:59

of scientists, software engineers, and

3:02

really got to learn a lot about

3:04

the geospatial industry specifically.

3:06

And then, yeah,

3:08

more recently, have switched to

3:11

a downstream geospatial analytics

3:13

company

3:14

called Regrow AG, working

3:16

on

3:17

using satellite imagery in Google

3:19

Earth Engine, among other geospatial insights

3:22

to essentially give better

3:24

insights to sustainability

3:26

for the agriculture industry, generally.

3:29

So just working in my own way

3:31

to mitigate my

3:34

own carbon footprint by hiring

3:36

people who know what they're doing in

3:39

the geospatial agriculture and software

3:41

industry. So

3:42

yeah, I frankly got lucky, but

3:45

what I've just really enjoyed is

3:47

how interesting the geospatial sector

3:49

can be, how many different use cases

3:52

there've been, and

3:53

frankly also how nice the people

3:55

in the industry as well are. That's

3:58

not always the case.

3:59

It seems everyone comes from a common thread

4:02

of being kind on

4:04

top of just being very, very intelligent

4:06

and interesting to talk to. That's interesting

4:09

you say that. That's something I really appreciate about

4:11

it as well. To be honest,

4:13

I haven't got that much experience

4:16

in other industries and other sectors,

4:18

but I like that people are relatively

4:20

open in this one. I like that

4:22

interactions that I have with people online, especially,

4:25

they seem to lead with kindness. I might not

4:27

agree with what I'm saying or my point of view,

4:29

but the point is that it's a

4:31

discussion as opposed to an argument. I really appreciate

4:34

that. Wow, you have a breadth

4:36

of experience in this industry from Google to

4:39

Descartes Labs to your current position.

4:41

I think you mentioned you moved to Descartes

4:43

Labs during their Series B. This

4:46

is relatively early on in the

4:48

company's history. What was the major difference that

4:50

you noticed, like moving away from Google and established

4:53

a big organization to

4:55

a company that had just raised their Series

4:57

B underground? It's a

4:59

really interesting question.

5:01

Funny enough, I think everyone has

5:03

this perception obviously that the

5:05

Googles of the world and these

5:08

large companies just have

5:10

everything 100% figured out

5:13

and

5:13

that there's such a rigidity to it.

5:16

Honestly, that wasn't my experience

5:19

from Google. I think I have frankly

5:21

a fair amount of autonomy and really

5:23

got to expose myself

5:25

to a level of recruiting that I appreciated

5:28

at

5:28

Google and obviously learned best

5:31

practices across the board. They

5:33

do an

5:34

incredible time just making sure everyone's

5:36

prepared and have enough

5:38

resources around them.

5:40

But then transitioning to Descartes Labs,

5:42

it was so

5:45

different.

5:47

Instead of hiring at Google,

5:49

I would hire 10 people

5:51

in a week sometimes.

5:52

That

5:56

was a lot different from Descartes Labs where we had

5:58

to be cautious.

5:59

with how we were spending money and

6:03

just making sure that we're putting all of the resources

6:05

in the right place. But luckily through

6:07

this, Descartes Labs was such a

6:09

great entry into geospatial because

6:12

I got to

6:14

see some of the best people in the

6:16

geospatial industry and

6:18

work with them closely. And as

6:20

you had mentioned, have that kindness

6:23

that we see in the geospatial industry. So

6:25

I just had an infinite

6:27

amount of people who were willing to take the

6:29

time and

6:30

teach me what being geospatial

6:33

industry was like. And it

6:34

was a lot different from

6:36

a resource perspective. We had to

6:38

figure a lot of things out ourselves. We

6:41

had to just iterate and see what

6:44

works, what doesn't work and be quick

6:47

to abandon process or

6:49

add

6:49

new processes, but

6:51

really learned a lot of what a

6:53

less mature company looks like. But

6:55

I think around the company

6:58

generally, there's such an attitude

7:00

of getting things done that everyone

7:03

was on the same page. So it was

7:05

surprising how easy it became

7:08

over time once I had that context

7:11

for the company, which I think is just

7:13

a credit to everyone who was

7:15

there at the time.

7:16

So it sounds like you had a lot of help.

7:18

You talked about understanding the

7:20

geospatial world and the help, the

7:22

kindness you experienced from your colleagues at Descartes

7:25

Labs.

7:26

Was it hard to hire

7:28

for geospatial roles? Because it

7:30

sounded like you were in the process of understanding the industry

7:32

yourself. My guess is that maybe

7:35

not being a deep expert in it

7:37

at that stage and then hiring

7:39

for geospatial roles, I'm wondering if

7:41

that was difficult.

7:43

And let me give some context here. Oftentimes in

7:45

geospatial land, we say things like spatial is

7:47

special. And I'm wondering if

7:50

it is in terms of hiring for geospatial roles

7:52

or is it just like hiring for any

7:54

other technical role? Yeah,

7:57

it's a good question. And I

7:59

think...

7:59

Unfortunately, I'm going to have a

8:02

caveat answer because

8:04

it really depends. And there are

8:06

a lot of different aspects to hiring geospatial

8:10

skill sets generally that make it

8:12

both more difficult as well as less

8:14

difficult. First and foremost,

8:16

obviously, the volume of qualified

8:19

candidates is going to be less in any

8:21

sort of specialty

8:23

skill set. Geospatial, of course,

8:26

among them as well. So there's just

8:28

a smaller pool to pull from

8:30

in the appropriate skill sets when

8:32

you're hiring a

8:34

geospatial data scientist

8:36

with remote sensing and mining

8:38

experience. That's going

8:41

to be such a limited pool. But

8:44

to the advantage, what's interesting is

8:46

because there's

8:47

so many common

8:50

skill sets among these

8:52

candidates. When I'm hiring

8:54

a technical role, say a software

8:56

engineer or a scientist, and

8:58

they have to have GDAL experience

9:01

or geopandas experience, any

9:04

sort of these geospatial skill sets,

9:06

it narrows it down and it makes my job easier

9:09

because I know exactly where to look. I

9:12

can look at geospatial Reddit

9:15

threads and I

9:17

can look at a resume and see, yep, this person

9:19

has GDAL. Great, let's get them on the phone

9:21

and actually talk about it.

9:23

So it almost has a few different

9:26

components to it that make it both more difficult

9:28

from a limited volume perspective,

9:31

but also easier because it's easier to filter

9:33

out the non-important skill

9:36

sets and really focus on

9:38

the key technical skills that are going to be important

9:40

for success. Yes, I think

9:42

this is interesting. It almost sounded like a geopandas

9:45

GDAL was a proxy for, yes,

9:47

this means a geospatial person

9:50

in some ways, I guess it is.

9:52

What else could I do as a candidate

9:55

to stand out in your eyes apart from having

9:57

these sort of keywords scattered throughout

9:59

my opinion?

9:59

What else are you looking for? How

10:02

do I stand out? How do I get noticed during

10:04

the hiring process? Yeah, I mean,

10:07

first and foremost, and I can't

10:09

emphasize this enough, resume

10:12

formatting and CV formatting

10:14

is actually very important

10:16

because oftentimes

10:18

the gatekeepers to the roles, in

10:20

this case, myself, recruiters,

10:23

don't have the deep technical

10:25

skill sets to understand the nuances

10:28

of the projects you're working on. And

10:30

so we do look for keywords. We

10:32

look for,

10:33

does this person have these technical

10:36

skills that I know are necessary?

10:38

And they have to be heavily featured on

10:41

the resume for me to decide to move forward.

10:44

And as such, resume formatting, clear

10:46

formatting, and emphasizing the

10:49

translatable skill sets is incredibly

10:52

important.

10:53

More so,

10:54

what I've seen with a lot of geospatial

10:57

candidates is they've worked on a lot

10:59

of projects over time. And

11:01

those projects may vary from academic projects

11:04

to side projects. And oftentimes

11:07

what I find is the candidates

11:10

who have

11:11

the directly related skills. So

11:14

in my current role at Regrow Agriculture,

11:16

I

11:16

may see an overlap with

11:19

a yield prediction

11:22

model that some geospatial data scientists

11:25

had worked on. And

11:26

just that one relevant touchpoint

11:29

in their background experience is really

11:31

important for me to understand, hey,

11:34

this may be a great candidate who's worked

11:36

on some very similar problems.

11:38

And I always...

11:41

The nuances of cover letters as

11:43

well. I know

11:46

many companies do not review cover letters,

11:48

so I don't want to promise that cover letters will

11:50

always be removed or reviewed.

11:54

But it's important because that allows

11:56

you to speak the story of

11:59

why you are specifically...

11:59

interested in the

12:01

company that you're applying for and that

12:03

really makes the difference and makes an application

12:06

stand out. It's interesting that you mentioned

12:08

that you know sometimes you can see the overlap.

12:10

Are you expecting that you do that

12:13

work that you're the one looking for the

12:15

overlap you know putting two and two together or

12:18

are you hoping that the candidate shows up and

12:20

says hey I know you asked for this I

12:22

haven't done this but here's a similar project

12:25

this is the overlap and have them like

12:27

show you the overlap. It

12:29

really depends to be honest

12:31

and it depends on a lot

12:34

of actually the macroeconomic

12:36

climate and what the job hiring

12:38

you

12:39

know space looks like at the time. Sometimes

12:42

depending on how competitive the landscape

12:44

is I we won't even receive

12:47

applications for different roles

12:49

so I'll have to go out and seek out

12:52

those relevant projects and experiences

12:54

and you know do what we call a sourcing

12:57

to find the right candidates

12:59

in the right experience at the right time

13:02

which is a lot more you know on me to see

13:04

those relevant overlap. When the markets

13:07

such as now

13:09

typically favors the employer it

13:11

becomes important for candidates to

13:13

highlight and you know differentiate

13:15

themselves because ultimately it's

13:18

more of a volume game when

13:20

the the market is kind of in a downturn

13:23

for candidates generally so it's

13:25

important to always highlight

13:27

you know as important as possible the

13:30

relevant overlap and skill sets that you

13:32

have from your previous experience.

13:34

And let's say you weren't getting

13:36

any applications and

13:38

the market was favoring the candidates and you were

13:40

out sort of seeking candidates for your

13:42

role where would you be looking at in like

13:45

obviously this depends on the project but what kinds of

13:47

things are you looking for? Yeah you know

13:49

I do a similar type

13:51

of search from when I'm looking at resumes

13:55

so you know a primary tool

13:57

that everyone's gonna be familiar with is of course

13:59

LinkedIn.

13:59

which is still to

14:02

this date, the most important

14:04

professional networking

14:06

site generally. What

14:08

I'll do is

14:09

run a keyword search on

14:11

the backend.

14:12

A little behind the curtain

14:14

moment, but a recruiter

14:17

version of LinkedIn looks quite a

14:19

bit different than the LinkedIn that most

14:21

people are going to be aware of. It has a lot

14:23

of search features and functionality

14:26

that allows me to filter these

14:28

candidates appropriately. As

14:31

such, I'm able to run

14:34

essentially a keyword search on

14:36

my backend

14:37

to find things using the example

14:39

again, like GDAL, Geopandas.

14:42

It'll run a full scrape

14:44

of their profile so that I can only

14:47

reach out to the most relevant candidate. And

14:49

then it's just the manual look

14:52

through all these profiles, see

14:55

who seems to stick out and then ultimately

14:58

see if I can get them on the phone

15:00

to sell them on the opportunity. I

15:02

think this is a really good insight. I think a lot

15:04

of people,

15:05

especially in the technical world, tend

15:07

to focus on maybe Twitter and LinkedIn

15:09

feels a little bit boring perhaps.

15:12

But I think if you're looking for a job, it's probably

15:14

worth then thinking about having

15:16

some of these keywords and making sure you're

15:18

documenting your experience and

15:20

understanding in the tools that you're using in such a way

15:22

that people like yourself can

15:24

find you. Absolutely. Yeah.

15:27

I also think LinkedIn can be quite boring

15:29

at times. Just add

15:31

a full transparency.

15:33

But it is really important

15:35

to have almost a

15:38

carbon copy of your resume,

15:40

specifically the level of detail

15:42

associated on your resume to be reflected

15:44

on your LinkedIn. So that regardless

15:47

if you respond or not, that the

15:49

recruiters can find you in the proper

15:52

ways as well.

15:53

I do also encourage using more

15:56

creative channels. messages

16:00

me on Twitter, frankly, they'll

16:02

probably have a higher

16:04

success rate because the volume is going

16:07

to be lower

16:08

and they'll be specifically seeking

16:10

out the opportunities that I have.

16:13

As such, it makes for a pretty interesting...

16:15

So I recommend always pursuing

16:18

a composite approach

16:20

in many ways and try as many channels as possible.

16:23

That

16:23

is really interesting. I think a lot of people

16:25

would be maybe a little bit, not

16:27

afraid, but cautious about doing that,

16:30

wondering if they're overstepping the mark. But it's

16:32

really interesting to hear you say that. So we've been talking

16:34

about how to stand out in

16:36

the hiring process and you gave us some good insights

16:39

there, which I really appreciate. Maybe

16:41

we should address the elephant in the room. So lately in tech,

16:43

there's been a lot of layoffs.

16:46

And I guess what this has meant,

16:48

I mean, you know more about this than me, but my

16:50

guess is this has kind of flooded the market with a lot

16:52

of very qualified people, very qualified

16:55

technical people. What are you seeing when you

16:57

try and hire for geospatial

16:59

roles? Has this had any effects that

17:01

you can see? Yeah, unfortunately

17:03

it has. And what we

17:06

see as recruitment

17:09

in tech and specifically in geospatial

17:11

is that these layoffs affect

17:15

the volume of candidates

17:16

that we're attracting to any

17:18

position. Obviously, each

17:20

of these large tech companies and even

17:22

smaller geospatial companies have all

17:25

changed in size and they've

17:27

also changed their hiring outlook. So

17:29

there are

17:30

currently less opportunities for

17:33

software engineers, data scientists,

17:35

and the market itself is pretty

17:38

difficult right now and is

17:40

probably

17:41

more difficult than it has specifically

17:43

over the last

17:44

probably six years or so.

17:46

And as such, it's even more

17:48

important to be able to stand out

17:51

in an application. So I'll

17:53

give an example. At my current role,

17:56

if I were to post a geospatial

17:58

data scientist position or a geospatial

18:01

software engineering position, I may

18:03

attract somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 to 200 applications

18:06

in a 48-hour period, which really emphasizes

18:08

the need to stand out

18:16

and to use a multi-channel

18:18

approach, reach out on

18:20

LinkedIn in addition to applying

18:23

online and follow all

18:25

the companies on social medias. And

18:27

these are the difference makers because when

18:30

I look at two applications side by

18:32

side and they're very similar

18:34

in experience, but I see that this

18:36

candidate follows us on Twitter

18:39

and LinkedIn and has liked

18:41

several posts and just feels

18:43

like a really engaged candidate,

18:46

that can be all the difference that's required for

18:48

me to decide to move forward with X candidate

18:51

over the one that doesn't have that level of engagement.

18:55

More generally, in tough job markets

18:57

like we're seeing today, my biggest recommendation

18:59

is

19:00

to stay persistent and to stay

19:03

patient. It can be

19:04

extraordinarily frustrating

19:07

as a job seeker to be denied

19:10

opportunities to

19:12

be rejected, of course, and you

19:14

really have to remain optimistic through these

19:16

trying times and

19:18

find out

19:19

all of the different opportunities that you're

19:21

interested in seeking out. Maybe now's

19:23

the time to consider a

19:25

career change

19:27

into a different role or to bring

19:29

on new responsibilities. Take a certificate

19:32

program that may be directly applicable

19:34

to the job you're pursuing. It's a good

19:36

opportunity to really make

19:38

sure that you're positioning yourself correctly

19:40

because in a tough job market,

19:42

you have to be very, very competitive.

19:45

Yeah, thank you very much for that. I think that's

19:47

fascinating that you've within 48 hours that

19:50

you can expect to get 200 applications.

19:53

It's kind of amazing. Yeah,

19:56

I can check my inbox some days and I'm

19:58

just like, oh no, how am I?

19:59

How am I going to do this? Yeah.

20:02

I guess from your side, it's also overwhelming.

20:05

Although my guess is that you could probably

20:07

pretty quickly filter out

20:09

a good chunk of those, but still, it's

20:11

a lot of people to consider.

20:14

Yeah, definitely. I want to ask

20:16

a question around being over and under

20:18

qualified. I'm sort of hoping that you can

20:20

help people understand when am I overqualified?

20:23

When am I under qualified? Because when

20:25

I think about a job, a role, a position,

20:27

I think like sometimes I'll be overqualified

20:29

for some of the things I'm doing and sometimes

20:31

I'll be under qualified. But it'd be

20:33

interesting to hear your perspective on it. When

20:36

do you think or is

20:38

there anything we should be thinking about when

20:40

we're applying for a position and we're like, ah,

20:42

I don't know where I land on this scale

20:45

here on the spectrum?

20:46

That's a great question. And I

20:49

hate to once again give a,

20:51

it depends answer, but

20:53

it really does depend on quite a few

20:55

different things. So when we

20:58

have a level associated

21:01

with a role,

21:02

obviously senior, junior, mid-career,

21:06

just a few common examples,

21:08

there's a few reasons why we have

21:11

it leveled, which is either the

21:13

nature of the work. If

21:15

the work is low level

21:18

and suited for someone just

21:20

starting in say their data

21:23

engineering, geospatial data engineering

21:25

career, and the

21:27

nature of the work isn't that complicated and

21:30

is more suitable for a junior level employee,

21:32

we oftentimes are seeking

21:35

specifically those junior level employees

21:37

because we know that the type of work

21:39

is going to be more suitable for that level of

21:41

experience. And then of course, the financial

21:44

aspects as well. Sometimes

21:46

I only have X budget for this role.

21:49

And so I know that means that it's going to be a more

21:51

junior candidate, or

21:53

if that budget is quite a bit larger,

21:55

maybe we can bring on a senior or even

21:58

a principal data scientist.

21:59

And it really kind of depends on a few

22:02

factors of the seniority level.

22:04

But for you yourself as a job

22:06

seeker, specifically when you're

22:09

seeking opportunities with smaller companies,

22:12

I would always hesitate to recommend

22:15

excluding yourself from

22:17

an opportunity. So oftentimes,

22:20

maybe a junior data scientist positions

22:22

opened up at a small company and a

22:24

senior data scientist is interested in

22:26

the company but is nervous about

22:29

being overqualified for the role. Oftentimes

22:32

I'd probably recommend to still

22:34

apply to

22:36

those roles and specifically

22:38

maybe reach out to a

22:40

recruiter or any connections that you have

22:42

within the company to mention, Hey,

22:45

I feel like I

22:47

might be overqualified for this position,

22:50

but I'm so interested in X

22:52

role and X company that

22:55

I thought I'd at least reach out.

22:58

And I think that allows for

23:00

a much more flexible opening into

23:03

the companies that you're seeking employment

23:06

for. Because oftentimes, on

23:08

the back end, I'm just trying to fill

23:10

whatever positions I have on my plate.

23:13

And although I may have a junior data scientist

23:16

position opened up, I may know

23:18

that there is a senior or principal

23:20

data scientist that's opening up just in

23:22

a couple weeks. And

23:25

as such, by excluding yourself

23:27

from the opportunity, I won't have

23:29

the opportunity to be like, Oh, yeah, I

23:31

have that senior role that's opening

23:33

up in a month. Let me take this call

23:35

with this candidate. So I'd recommend

23:38

oftentimes to try and not disqualify

23:41

yourself for being underqualified

23:43

or overqualified and

23:45

frankly, put the agency on the company

23:47

to make that decision for you. That

23:50

way you at least have some exposure into

23:52

the company generally. I

23:54

think this makes a lot of sense. And when you're talking about

23:57

junior, senior and principal data

23:59

science.

23:59

this in this case. It

24:02

makes sense to divide the

24:04

roles up that depending on the task that you have

24:06

at hand, the task that needs to be done and

24:08

maybe the compensation that's

24:10

available at the moment. I can see

24:13

how either you can decide

24:15

whether you're under-qualified or over-qualified

24:17

for those particular roles. But what about if you're

24:20

moving to somewhere new? You're a technical

24:22

person and you're wanting to move into

24:24

a leadership role or perhaps a less

24:27

technical role. How do you decide,

24:29

and

24:29

this is from both sides of the coin,

24:32

how do you decide whether I'm under-qualified

24:34

or over-qualified for this? Because I think

24:37

people grow and develop during their careers

24:39

and it's not unthinkable that technical people might want

24:42

to become less technical and more involved in the

24:44

leadership side of things. Yeah, it's a great

24:46

question. Oftentimes, we

24:48

see that a lot. People who are interested

24:51

in changing their role,

24:51

changing their responsibility

24:55

and

24:56

what we still look for

24:58

are those translatable skill sets.

25:01

So I'll give an example, two examples

25:03

probably. Say we have a junior

25:06

data scientist who wants to switch into

25:09

a sales engineering role.

25:11

That's a pretty common transition

25:14

that we see specifically for geospatial

25:16

data scientists. And so when

25:18

I'm looking at an application

25:20

from a junior data scientist for a sales engineer,

25:23

I know the sentiment right away. Obviously,

25:26

I can see that they're hoping to maybe

25:28

make a change.

25:30

And so what I'm looking for are still

25:32

those translatable skill sets. So

25:34

oftentimes, I'll look,

25:36

have they seemingly had any customer

25:38

interaction in their roles? Have they

25:40

focused on customer projects? Have

25:43

they done demos for

25:45

different scientific projects and still looking for those

25:48

translatable skill sets? But oftentimes,

25:51

when you are pursuing a career

25:53

change,

25:54

you have to be much more intentional about

25:56

how you present your information

25:59

so that

25:59

that intentionality

26:02

about changing careers. Say,

26:04

if you're an individual contributor

26:06

hoping to switch into a management

26:08

track, you're going to need to be more intentional

26:10

about how you present that information. So

26:13

you can use things like objective

26:16

statements in resumes. Obviously,

26:18

as I had mentioned, cover letters are

26:20

actually probably a great opportunity to really

26:23

get that point across of, hey,

26:25

I've spent the last seven years as an individual

26:28

contributor. I've

26:29

maybe led technical projects,

26:31

but now I want to get into people management.

26:34

And you have to speak that

26:37

intentionality through cover letter, through

26:40

these opportunities. And then you do just

26:42

have to be more patient

26:45

is what I'd refer to because you

26:47

may be competing against candidates

26:50

that have direct related experience.

26:52

But if

26:53

it's something that you really want to pursue,

26:55

you need to

26:56

just speak with that intentionality

26:59

of why you're hoping to make that change.

27:01

And then one more point that I'd like to add

27:04

is oftentimes, what

27:06

we see is changing company sizes

27:08

is actually a great opportunity to

27:12

change actually your career trajectory.

27:15

So if you're at a small

27:17

startup or small

27:20

company, there's going to be a lot

27:22

more flexibility in your role and

27:25

assignments day to day, but

27:27

it'll give you good exposure to the skill

27:29

sets that then you can go to

27:31

a larger company that has

27:34

more training programs and more

27:36

resources

27:37

accessible to potentially

27:39

change careers and

27:42

use this composite approach of small

27:44

company and large company to gain the

27:47

skill sets that you're really seeking

27:49

for.

27:49

That is a really good insight. That sounds like a great

27:52

idea. I want to stay on this topic

27:54

just for a second here. And I'm wondering

27:57

if you can give us an understanding

27:59

of how much.

27:59

experience plays

28:02

into your decision and how much

28:04

qualifications play into your decision when we

28:06

think about making a change from perhaps

28:08

a technical role to

28:10

a leadership position. And I

28:12

wonder, I hope you understand the question here, but if I have experience,

28:15

you talked about experience kind of things before, leading

28:17

projects, giving customer demos, that

28:20

kind of thing, how do you weigh

28:22

that against something like, I've done a lot of

28:24

courses, I've been on a leadership course and

28:27

participated in this sort of official

28:29

qualification? Yeah, it's an interesting

28:32

question and to that point,

28:34

I think maybe an important thing

28:37

to realize is that

28:38

myself as a recruiter and any

28:41

person in recruiter are essentially,

28:43

we have customers which

28:45

are hiring managers.

28:47

And these hiring managers are the individuals

28:50

that have to make the final decision

28:52

on the candidates that we end up hiring.

28:55

And as a result, what I have

28:57

to do as a recruiter is to understand

28:59

the

29:01

tolerance level of the

29:03

hiring manager that I'm supporting. Do

29:05

they emphasize what skill

29:07

sets are most important for them? Are

29:10

they open to bringing from non-traditional

29:12

backgrounds? And that's going to vary from

29:15

person to person, from department

29:17

to department. And it's kind of a learning

29:20

experience to understand what hiring managers

29:22

are specifically looking for. My, myself,

29:26

what I look for is kind of a composite.

29:28

And I kind of use that word a lot of,

29:31

I'm not looking for any one thing, but

29:33

instead I'm looking for enough touch points

29:36

for what I'm really evaluating

29:38

for. Whether that comes from, obviously,

29:41

on the side of technical experience,

29:44

doing exactly the right job that

29:46

I'm looking for, or, Hey,

29:48

I see that they're a software

29:50

engineer, but they've

29:51

taken these leadership courses

29:54

and they've taken these online courses. So I can see

29:56

kind of that

29:57

intentionality and that thread that we're

29:59

looking for.

29:59

runs through their profile and experience.

30:02

And depending on what my hiring

30:04

manager is really looking for, that's

30:07

where I can understand, you know, Hey, they're

30:09

open to someone who doesn't have

30:11

direct management experience, but is headed

30:14

in that direction.

30:15

So then that allows me to have the flexibility

30:18

to reach out for those slightly

30:20

less traditional candidates. This

30:22

is really interesting. So what I'm hearing you say

30:25

is that you're in the middle. You sound almost

30:27

like a real estate agent where someone

30:30

is selling a house on one side and someone's

30:32

buying a house on the other side. And you're the go-between.

30:34

I think up until now, in my

30:37

mind, you were the end stop. You were the person

30:39

that made the final decision. But I

30:41

think that this adds an extra

30:43

dynamic to the situation for me. So I appreciate

30:45

you walking us through that. Right at the start of the conversation,

30:48

we talked about those differences between going

30:50

from a big, well-established company to, you know,

30:53

a startup. Do you see differences when

30:55

you hire for these different kinds of

30:57

organizations as well? And if you do, maybe

30:59

you could walk us

31:00

through some of them. What are you looking for

31:02

in a, if you're hiring for Google,

31:04

what are you looking for if you're hiring for a startup?

31:07

Yeah, it's, it's interesting. I

31:09

think what there is, is

31:11

a much more

31:13

tolerance for large companies.

31:16

And I say that because they have

31:18

essentially just more resources in place

31:21

to absorb candidates from those non-traditional

31:24

backgrounds or

31:26

that have kind of different types of skill

31:28

sets generally. Which

31:30

is why I do recommend that larger

31:33

companies are a great entry point

31:35

for early stage

31:37

or transitioning candidates

31:39

because it's almost a landing spot where

31:41

you can learn the

31:43

proper skill sets.

31:44

But I always also recommend not to

31:46

get into the trap of staying

31:49

too large of companies if

31:51

things like startups and everything

31:53

are in interest to you. You

31:55

want to make sure that you don't get too stuck in how

31:57

a large company operates because

31:59

it is.

31:59

is quite a bit different

32:02

from these smaller companies. But

32:04

to that end, when I'm hiring for

32:07

a large company such as Google or

32:09

even previously when I would staff for

32:12

even solar fields and things

32:14

like that, I knew it was going to be a volume

32:17

gain. And what I would look

32:19

for is I knew I could get 100, if not 1,000. I mean, at Google, we

32:25

would average, I don't

32:27

even know how many applications per day.

32:30

And as such, I knew it was never going to be

32:32

an absence in the quality

32:35

of candidates. Whereas at

32:37

a smaller company, we do just have to be

32:39

more

32:40

intentional. We have to see those

32:42

types of skill sets. We have

32:44

to do more outreach to find

32:46

the right candidates. It's just a different

32:49

skill set altogether where larger

32:51

companies are going to have a higher tolerance. And

32:54

then smaller companies just need to fill

32:56

the position as soon as possible because

32:59

when a startup posts a position,

33:01

you know that something's probably on fire

33:04

on the backend. And there's some pipeline

33:06

that stopped working and no one knows exactly

33:09

what's going wrong. And

33:10

there's just a sense of urgency,

33:13

which is both a really,

33:15

maybe stressful, I can say that,

33:17

but also really rewarding environment

33:19

to see that tangible one-to-one.

33:22

We're hiring this person to solve

33:24

X problem as well. When you

33:26

describe it like that, it doesn't sound

33:28

like just the question of finding the right candidate

33:30

in terms of the hard skills. It also sounds like finding

33:32

the right candidate in terms of the soft skills.

33:34

Who's going to take ownership for this thing

33:37

here? Who is not too proud to get

33:39

their hands dirty and be expected

33:41

to do a wider range of jobs?

33:44

At least that's what I

33:47

think of when I listen to you talk. Am

33:49

I on the right track?

33:50

Honestly, I think that the

33:53

soft skills are oftentimes

33:55

the most important

33:58

aspect of any candidate.

33:59

candidate. And it may

34:02

depend slightly on the

34:04

role. If it's an

34:06

individual contributor working on

34:08

an isolated project, it might

34:11

matter less those soft skills. We

34:14

just need the hard technical skills

34:16

that can get the technical project done.

34:19

But oftentimes, I find that that's not really the

34:21

case because with any

34:23

technical role,

34:24

there's going to be teamwork, collaboration,

34:27

there's

34:28

going to be a context

34:30

that's required to be truly

34:33

successful in that role. And

34:35

I can speak to my current company now, Regrow

34:37

Agriculture, and we receive

34:40

a lot of interest. There's obviously a lot

34:42

of interest in the climate tech space right now.

34:45

So people with geospatial backgrounds

34:47

and software engineering

34:48

are seeking out climate opportunities.

34:51

And it allows us to be somewhat

34:53

selective. And one of the main

34:56

criteria that we really select against

34:58

is can this technical

35:01

candidate

35:02

speak to the customer? And

35:04

that's really a skill set

35:06

that's really important.

35:07

I think individual contributors,

35:09

software engineers, and frankly, even

35:12

things like geospatial data scientists,

35:14

lose the broader context

35:17

of who is paying for

35:19

us to do this work.

35:21

And instead, they're so focused

35:23

on, well, I use the cutting edge

35:26

machine learning tool to do

35:28

object segmentation on satellite imagery,

35:31

which is obviously super cool and a

35:33

really exciting project. But

35:35

the difference between

35:36

that candidate who's done this deeply

35:39

technical

35:40

skill set versus the one who

35:42

knows, hey,

35:43

I had to ship a project

35:45

in two weeks because the customer needed

35:48

x. So I didn't have time to

35:50

do a full deep learning model. I just

35:52

came up with a statistical model that

35:55

made sense for the application in the

35:57

time that I was given. And that

35:59

type of context and customer

36:02

kind of focus is really

36:04

a huge difference maker. And

36:06

I would encourage any scientist

36:09

or engineer or deeply technical,

36:11

especially geospatial person

36:13

to start to absorb that context.

36:16

Understand what customers are doing,

36:18

talk to your salespeople and

36:20

really kind of get that broader context because

36:23

that can make a huge difference for

36:25

accessibility into the market

36:27

generally. What would you I'm curious,

36:30

what would you give the same kind of advice

36:32

to academics that we're looking

36:35

to leave academia and

36:37

move into the private sector? That's probably

36:39

the biggest recommendation I

36:41

would give to academia.

36:43

It's always going to be tough.

36:45

Obviously, we know academics

36:48

have to be focused in

36:50

their applications because,

36:52

you know, they have to publish, they have

36:55

to focus, they have to work

36:57

with their PIs and everything. But

36:59

the most successful academics

37:02

who are transitioning out of academia

37:04

are

37:05

going to be the ones who can still

37:07

not even necessarily know the context

37:10

because obviously it's going to be very different in

37:12

industry rather than academia,

37:14

but rather just be able to speak to

37:17

that customer context.

37:20

Oftentimes, I talk with a

37:22

lot of geospatial academics and

37:24

the ones who can speak

37:26

to why they're really hoping to

37:29

transition out of academia because

37:31

they want to see that

37:32

tangible customer impact

37:34

and really kind of pursue

37:37

industry opportunities for the right reasons,

37:40

I think can make a huge difference.

37:42

And oftentimes, what I still look

37:44

for are kind of those translatable use

37:46

cases. So an academic

37:49

may not be working with a large

37:51

enterprise customer, of course, but they

37:53

still have a team of stakeholders

37:56

that they have to do to push out research

37:59

and timeline. lines and project

38:01

management.

38:02

And so I still look for kind of those soft skill

38:04

sets and I hope that they can translate

38:07

the differences between industry and

38:10

academia

38:11

because they run at a different pace

38:14

is what I'd say. Yeah.

38:16

Yeah, I am sure they do. Okay,

38:18

so I think you've given us a lot of great insight

38:20

in

38:21

what you're looking for, depending on the kind

38:23

of role you're trying to fill and some of the challenges

38:25

around it. And I really appreciate

38:28

that. I wonder if we could move on and sort of think about

38:30

post selection process. So you've found

38:32

a person that you want to work with, that you want to

38:34

hire, and it's time

38:37

to negotiate a contract. Are

38:39

you expecting candidates to negotiate?

38:42

It's a good question. And it really

38:44

depends on the role. And

38:47

I'll say specifically, when I'm hiring

38:50

a junior

38:51

geospatial data scientist, for

38:53

instance, I'm probably anticipating

38:56

a little bit less negotiation than if

38:58

I'm hiring a sales executive,

39:01

for instance. I know that that's going to come

39:03

with 10

39:04

versions of that offer. And

39:07

really, you've

39:08

seen that skill set of negotiation

39:11

live with the sales folks, but I

39:13

am expecting negotiation. I

39:15

think specifically over the last

39:17

probably five to six years,

39:20

we've seen that there's been an increase

39:23

in agency and transparency

39:25

around pay

39:27

for candidates and the broader job

39:29

market. And with that becomes

39:31

a lot more empowered candidates.

39:34

So oftentimes when I'm

39:36

approaching an offer

39:38

stage with a candidate, I'm frankly expecting

39:40

the candidate to probably do some negotiation.

39:44

But how that negotiation goes

39:46

is really important for the candidate

39:49

and for the company itself. Because

39:53

you have a lot of opportunities to increase

39:55

your total compensation package, but

39:58

it is still a delicate topic.

41:55

We're

42:00

still testing each other out. No

42:02

one signed any documents yet. We're building

42:04

a relationship together. And I

42:06

think you

42:07

were stressing earlier that the idea here

42:09

is to not burn the bridges, to

42:12

be cautious and approach this

42:14

in the most respectful way possible. So

42:17

how do I not sound like

42:19

just an entitled greedy person that just

42:22

wants everything? Yeah, it's a

42:24

good question. Those people are

42:26

out there, although they are luckily

42:28

pretty infrequent.

42:30

But what I would recommend

42:31

doing is to

42:34

really

42:34

pursue communication around compensation

42:37

very delicately. And one

42:39

of the biggest, if not

42:41

pretty simple tactic is to emphasize

42:44

your interest in the position

42:47

before bridging the topic

42:49

of negotiation. If

42:52

you send me a recruiter

42:54

an email that says, Hey, I

42:56

need at least $100,000 more for this opportunity

43:00

to be even remotely interesting

43:03

to me, that's obviously going to be a pretty aggressive

43:06

turn off and may

43:08

dictate a different outcome from

43:10

what you're expecting. But

43:12

instead, if you pursue it respectfully

43:14

and say, Hey,

43:15

Jed, I'm super excited

43:17

about this position. This is exactly

43:19

the type of company industry

43:22

position that I'm interested in, but I

43:24

have to have it make sense for me

43:27

financially. And then having

43:29

data driven decisions. So

43:32

we all have connections into the industry.

43:35

We all have access to Google.

43:37

We all have access to things like

43:39

Glassdoor, although I'd recommend probably

43:42

taking Glassdoor with a heavy

43:44

grain of salt if you're trying to get

43:46

salary data from it. But use

43:49

all of the resources available to you to

43:51

understand what your potential market

43:54

value is. That way you can understand

43:56

when you receive an offer, where that

43:58

falls in the spectrum of communication.

43:59

competitiveness.

44:01

And then using your

44:03

recruiter as a partner and approaching

44:06

it respectfully, say hey, I'm excited

44:08

about this opportunity. But I did see that

44:11

for US-based data scientists,

44:14

that this salary is a little bit more indicative

44:17

of my level of skill set.

44:19

What do you think about that? Is it possible?

44:21

What aspects of the offer are

44:23

negotiable? That way you have all

44:26

of the pieces in place

44:28

to make the proper negotiations.

44:31

Let's pretend for a second that pay

44:33

wasn't negotiable. What else

44:35

should I be focusing on then? If I can't

44:38

focus on the salary? Yeah, so if

44:40

salary is not negotiable, which happens

44:43

with somewhat frequency, you're going to

44:45

ask if there are other aspects to the offer

44:47

that are negotiable. Things may

44:50

be equity is oftentimes

44:52

an

44:53

easier lever to pull for

44:55

companies because it's obviously tied to

44:57

the long-term value

44:59

of the company. So you're going to want to see if equity

45:02

or stocks are negotiable. There's

45:04

also bonus structures that

45:06

may be accessible to you. So you may

45:09

be able to increase the percentage

45:11

of a yearly bonus. You may also

45:13

be able to negotiate a bonus at all.

45:16

You want to understand if signing bonuses

45:19

are part of the company culture. I'll

45:21

speak to my current company. We don't have

45:24

signing bonuses and we never have,

45:26

but many companies utilize signing bonuses

45:28

to overcome those hesitancies

45:31

around salary negotiations. And

45:34

then some more creative ones as well are

45:36

going to be benefits as well. You're

45:39

probably not going to be able to negotiate a

45:41

higher retirement contribution.

45:44

Those things are oftentimes more standard, but

45:46

you may be able to negotiate things

45:49

like learning and development stipends

45:51

or different kind of more perks

45:54

associated with the role that may be negotiable

45:57

from company to company. And that's really

45:59

how I round.

45:59

recommend pursuing negotiation

46:02

is to frankly just ask your recruiter,

46:04

what aspects of the offer

46:07

are negotiable.

46:08

That way you are working with the maximum

46:10

amount of knowledge of what can be changed,

46:13

even if it's not the salary. And

46:15

just so I'm clear, when do you think I should start

46:18

asking these questions? How early

46:20

is too early and how late is

46:22

too late? It's a good question. So oftentimes,

46:25

as I had mentioned, the best recruiters

46:28

will broach that topic as

46:30

soon as your first call with the candidate,

46:33

because they need to know those things to

46:35

understand where you are

46:37

leveling from,

46:38

where you're coming from, as far as salary

46:40

expectations, which are

46:42

very important early on in

46:44

the process. So you can expect sometimes

46:47

to have these discussions around salary

46:49

as soon as your first call with

46:51

a recruiter, which

46:52

can be off-putting, which is why I recommend

46:55

doing as much research into these topics

46:57

prior to applying as

46:59

possible. That way you can move with

47:02

as much knowledge. But as far

47:04

as once you're understanding what

47:06

aspects of the offer is negotiable, oftentimes

47:09

I'd recommend before and

47:12

on-site, or if you're

47:14

getting indications that this

47:16

next discussion is going to be your final

47:18

round of interviews.

47:20

I'd probably recommend at

47:23

that time, so pre-onsite

47:25

or pre-final interview, to have

47:28

another discussion with the recruiter

47:30

as your primary point of contact to

47:33

ask those questions and just say, Hey,

47:36

I know we're approaching the end of the interview

47:38

process. This has been great to

47:40

learn more about the company and the culture,

47:43

but I'd just like to have a little bit more thorough

47:45

discussion about the salary to

47:48

understand what flexibility there may be. And

47:50

the reason why I recommend to do it at this

47:53

point is because some companies

47:55

may turn around and offer after

47:57

a final round of interviews very quickly.

48:00

And depending on what you said

48:02

during that initial touchpoint,

48:04

they may turn around and offer with a

48:06

set number almost immediately after

48:08

a final round of interview. And if that's

48:11

the case, your negotiation can prove

48:13

more difficult because they already

48:16

have a number in mind from that first conversation.

48:19

So instead, I'd recommend right before

48:22

that final interview or on-site

48:24

interview to have that other discussion

48:27

with the recruiters to understand and

48:30

position yourself

48:32

more correctly for negotiations should

48:34

that conversation go well. Yeah. Well,

48:37

that sounds like it makes a lot of sense to

48:39

me. Do you have any stories around when

48:41

negotiations have gone wrong? I think

48:43

a few examples here would really cement

48:45

this in people's minds. What

48:48

we should be trying to avoid

48:50

and what we should be looking out for. Yeah. And

48:52

luckily, I continue to support

48:55

a lot of good hiring managers. So

48:57

luckily, the horror stories,

49:00

if you will, have been pretty

49:02

few and far between, but they're out there

49:04

and they exist. And I've experienced

49:06

probably more than my fair share of them. I've

49:09

had it both ways where

49:12

candidates have really,

49:15

really tried to heavily negotiate.

49:17

I've had some offers go to

49:20

six or seven revisions of

49:23

the offer because they were essentially

49:25

playing a negotiation game with many

49:28

companies. So they would get

49:30

an offer from us and then they would

49:32

take it to their other late stage company and

49:35

say, hey, I have an offer with this number.

49:37

Can you match it? And then play that

49:39

game back and forth quite a bit. And

49:42

that can work out to the candidate's

49:44

favor sometimes. But

49:47

I do recommend you need

49:49

to make sure that you understand what

49:51

you're valuing in an opportunity.

49:54

If it's exclusively money, that's great.

49:57

I wish you all the best and

49:59

I hope you... you enjoy your fang career

50:02

at Facebook and Google because

50:04

those are the only companies who are able to really

50:07

be extraordinarily competitive

50:09

with that salary. But instead, if you

50:11

are interested in those smaller companies

50:13

or those startups especially,

50:17

you have to understand what you're valuing in

50:19

an opportunity so that you're not playing these

50:21

negotiation games. Because frankly,

50:24

I have had some hiring managers

50:26

who hear that a negotiation

50:28

is happening. And

50:31

they have done the research themselves and

50:33

they've decided that this budget is exactly

50:36

appropriate for the role and it's

50:38

exactly appropriate for the candidate that

50:40

they're hoping to hire.

50:41

And frankly, and I will say this

50:44

isn't at my current company, so

50:46

I can give them a break specifically,

50:48

but

50:49

they've pulled the offer.

50:51

If a negotiation is

50:52

handled with disrespect

50:55

or feels exploitative,

50:58

it is always a possibility that a

51:00

hiring manager may rescind an offer.

51:03

It is not common to practice

51:06

because obviously by the time that we're making an

51:08

offer, we really do want to have you

51:10

come on board, but

51:11

it does happen. And you

51:13

just have to make sure that you,

51:15

regardless of if you are

51:17

negotiating, you have to be careful

51:20

and you have to be

51:22

respectful in your negotiation

51:24

because you never know how

51:26

the decision makers on the other side

51:28

are really going to react. And

51:31

so if you receive an offer

51:33

that's 50% less

51:36

than what you were expecting, that may be

51:38

a chance for you to pull out of the interview

51:40

process, but

51:41

you're likely never going to be able to negotiate

51:43

doubling your salary, for instance,

51:46

or even adding 40% to 50% to a

51:49

salary. So by having those conversations,

51:52

by knowing the market as early on as possible,

51:54

you may understand, hey, maybe

51:57

I can negotiate a 10% increase, but then most

51:59

of the time, I'm going

51:59

Most importantly, doing that respectfully

52:02

and

52:02

with the recruiter

52:05

as your partner and stakeholder in

52:07

the negotiations to make sure that

52:10

that type of negotiation doesn't

52:12

go bad. And I've had candidates

52:15

try and negotiate and then they lose out on

52:18

the opportunity. So you just really have to

52:20

be careful and respectful

52:22

of how you're approaching it, which isn't that

52:24

hard. And that's what I'd like to say.

52:26

And I would recommend for candidates to

52:29

try and negotiate, but I'd recommend

52:31

doing it as soon as possible throughout

52:33

the process and as respectfully as possible,

52:36

because that's going to lead to a better outcome.

52:38

And I think it'll be very rare that someone

52:41

will have their offer rescinded,

52:43

but it is a possibility.

52:45

When I'm listening to you, I'm thinking

52:47

there must also be a danger in pushing

52:49

it too far and getting the offer,

52:51

but leading to this bad blood between

52:53

the colleagues. Because

52:57

I guess you've got to keep remembering, I've got to work

52:59

with these people. I might get

53:02

what I want here and now, but if that's going

53:04

to lead to a terrible relationship

53:06

for the next five years, is it worth

53:08

it? Yeah, I would definitely

53:11

keep that in mind as you're negotiating.

53:14

And it's a conversation

53:15

that happens with the hiring

53:17

manager and the recruiter. So

53:20

if I as a recruiter am working with

53:22

a candidate who's asking for say a 25% increase

53:27

to their base salary and wants

53:29

to see if there's a bonus plan available

53:31

to them, I might take that to

53:33

the hiring manager. And very often

53:36

that hiring manager may be, well,

53:39

they were great through the interview process, but we've

53:41

only spoken with them over five

53:43

hours. We really

53:45

have no indication of how they're

53:48

actually going to translate their skill

53:50

sets into what we're doing here. And

53:52

oftentimes they can be held almost

53:55

on a pedestal to higher

53:57

expectations because of that negotiation.

54:00

Whereas if it's a junior data scientist

54:02

who we pay $60,000 no matter what, and we know they're

54:08

going to be able to do the job, that may be

54:10

a different factor. Whereas if it's

54:13

a senior software engineer who's negotiating

54:15

to a principal level software engineer,

54:18

with that level increase, there's

54:20

going to be an increase to the expectations.

54:23

So you want to make sure that when you're negotiating

54:26

to a level that your skillset is frankly

54:28

going to be matching those expectations

54:31

and skills. Wow, we've

54:33

come a long way in this conversation. I particularly

54:36

appreciate this last bit here

54:38

around negotiation. I think this is interesting

54:40

stuff. And I'm glad that

54:42

you have taken the time to share some of your

54:44

insights with us. If we step back now,

54:46

we think about hiring in general. Do

54:48

you ever hire freelancers on

54:51

like per project basis? Have you seen

54:53

that happening in the geospatial world almost

54:55

like as a test period?

54:56

Okay, let's hire them on for this while

54:58

and then move into being

55:01

a full-time employee. Or is it always

55:03

that

55:03

sort of standard hiring process

55:05

that most of us have been through before?

55:08

Where there's an interview phase, there's

55:10

maybe some tests, there's negotiation,

55:12

then you get the job and then you're a full-time employee. It's

55:14

a good question and it varies

55:17

so much. And so Regrow

55:20

Ag, for instance, before

55:22

our series B round of funding, there

55:24

was a lot of contract work,

55:26

there was a lot of freelance work, and there were

55:29

a lot of opportunities to get on

55:31

in non-traditional aspects.

55:33

And

55:34

that's very common for smaller companies

55:37

because it is working

55:39

on X project that needs to get done

55:41

and then move on to the next

55:43

thing, which requires a flexibility

55:46

that's more suitable for freelance

55:48

work or contract work, consultant

55:50

work. Around the

55:53

series B round of company where it's 100

55:55

plus employees, you're

55:58

probably going to see less flexibility.

55:59

ability in that, to be honest, because

56:02

instead around that stage of company is

56:04

where you start to invest in the long-term

56:07

vision of what you want your

56:09

employee base to look like. And if

56:11

there's such a different composite

56:14

of who makes up your company base

56:17

between freelancers and contractors

56:19

and full-time employees, it can

56:22

create a confusing vision in

56:24

some ways. So oftentimes around this stage,

56:26

you'll start to see more of an investment in

56:28

those traditional roles and everything as

56:30

well. But I always recommend

56:33

there's a lot of opportunities for

56:35

freelancers and consultants, specifically

56:38

for things like design

56:40

work or product management,

56:43

product consulting.

56:45

There's a lot of opportunities to really

56:47

come in in these non-traditional aspects,

56:49

but you just have to be much more creative in how

56:51

you seek out those opportunities.

56:53

Reach directly out to the department

56:55

head and say, Hey, I'm a

56:58

freelancer working on design work. I

57:00

noticed that this form is broken

57:02

on your contract entry

57:05

form. I'd be interested in helping out.

57:07

You have to be a little bit more creative and a little bit

57:09

more salesy to seek out those opportunities,

57:12

but ultimately they are out there. I

57:14

think that's difficult to do, but I could definitely send

57:16

the value in it instead of waiting for the

57:18

other person to discover you and what you

57:21

could do, how you could help them.

57:22

Of course, it makes a lot more sense to reach

57:24

out yourself. But I can imagine

57:27

that in pasta syndrome, showing up in

57:29

people and making it difficult

57:31

to take the first step itself. Definitely. I

57:34

think this is probably a great time to round off

57:36

the conversation. I just want to say I've

57:38

really enjoyed this. I really appreciate it. I

57:40

think hiring,

57:42

recruitment, and especially negotiation

57:45

is something that most people don't talk about,

57:47

but obviously it's a big part

57:49

of having a career. So thank you very

57:51

much for sharing some of your insights around

57:54

this topic. Much appreciated. Where can

57:56

people go if they listen to this and think,

57:58

oh, you know what? I really need to... to ask

58:00

this guy more questions, I want to contact

58:02

him. I want to see what he's up to. Is there anywhere

58:05

where you can point people towards? Yeah,

58:07

there's two places primarily. Well,

58:10

A, if you go to any geospatial

58:12

career fair, you're probably likely

58:14

to see me

58:16

give my spiel. But

58:18

you can always find me on LinkedIn. That's

58:21

going to be the most common place

58:23

to find me.

58:24

It's where I respond, hopefully,

58:26

to as many messages as possible, though

58:29

the volume can be difficult. But that's a great

58:31

place to

58:32

follow myself as well as the companies

58:34

I work for. Alternatively, you

58:36

can find me on Twitter at Jet

58:39

Recruits Geo is the

58:41

Twitter account, but you may have to deal

58:43

with more basketball knowledge

58:46

and not exclusively just

58:49

geospatial recruiting. So I'll

58:51

leave it to you if you want to go down that route.

58:53

Just as a favor to the audience, I think it's important I know

58:56

this. If I accidentally misspell your name

58:58

and refer to you as Jeff instead of Jet, will

59:01

you still reply? It's

59:04

a good question. I

59:06

have been called Jeff probably 5,000 times in

59:08

my career. So

59:11

I'm typically pretty fine with it now.

59:14

Now, if we've been working together for a month

59:17

for recruitment process, and then you call me Jeff,

59:19

that may be a different discussion, but

59:22

it happens all the time.

59:24

Right, well, again, appreciate

59:26

the insight. Thank you very much, Jet. Yeah,

59:29

thank you, Daniel.

59:31

Really hope you enjoyed that episode with Jet Metcalf.

59:35

As usual, there'll be links in the show notes to a few

59:37

different episodes that are relevant

59:39

to this one and also to where you can

59:41

reach out to Jet, where you can catch up with him on LinkedIn

59:44

and Twitter. Thanks very much for tuning in all the way

59:46

to the end. It's much appreciated. As always, I'll

59:48

be back again next week. I hope that you take the time

59:50

to join me then. Cheers.

1:00:00

you