[danielayele]

1) I'll be sending applications to companies and they can choose whether or not to interview candidates.

2) I haven't figured out specifics but I'll probably charge companies that successfully make hires through us something similar to what they'd pay via employee referrals.

3) Hustlebee is better than applying directly because companies will treat you as a more serious candidate (just like if you were to create a website dedicated to why you want to work for a company). This streamlines the process for people that REALLY want to work for a company and cuts down on the number of applicants that companies need to vet and the number of companies that people need to apply to.

4) I decided to start with designers/engineers because those appear to be the positions in highest demand right now. I may expand to other positions later but haven't yet decided exactly how I'll go about doing that.

5) I'll try to do this.

[mattcurry]

Not sure I follow your reasoning for #3. Filling out this form seems to be the absolute least someone can do if they really want to work at a particular company.

I think taking 5 minutes to find someone at the company and emailing them a personal email will be way more successful for a candidate.

Plus I'd worry that you will sound like just another recruiter when presenting me to the company, so it may end up hurting my chances.

[retube]

3) Why? All I've got to do is fill out your very simple form. Hardly the same as building a dedicated site targeting a particular company, and no harder than just applying directly. If anything it's easier: no CV, no covering letter etc.

[ktsmith]

I would add that it does nothing to help determine if the candidate is qualified which is the larger hurdle for most companies than attracting job applicants. This doesn't address that point at all.

[danielayele]

Because if you apply to a company through us, are accepted, and don't go through with it we won't allow you to apply to other companies through us. This makes it so that companies can actually trust the service to get committed candidates as opposed to just candidates who, if they applied via a similar service that was listed directly on the site, had no recourse if they didn't go through with the position.

[retube]

That's completely absurd. There could be a 1,000 very legitimate reasons why even a serious or committed candidate will not want to accept an offer: the pay's not right, the role isn't quite right, there's not enough responsibility (or too much) he doesn't think there's sufficient opportunity for career progression, he doesn't like his prospective boss or team, they want you to work in a different location, or travel a lot, or travel too little etc etc etc etc.

A job interview is not a one-way street. It's about discovery and due diligence. It's perfectly acceptable for either side to pull put if they feel that for whatever reason the other side isn't a good fit. And neither side can be sure of a fit until they enter discussions.

You'll just end up shooting yourself in the foot and ditching great candidates: bad for you, and bad for your clients.

[danielayele]

The idea is that some people can figure out most of this before applying and, for those people, hustlebee will simplify the process significantly. I don't expect that everyone will apply to jobs via us but I hope that we can provide a channel for those candidates who are extremely committed to a position to get an employer's attention without having to do the recruiting dance.

[retube]

But that's my point. Your form doesn't do any filtering at all. Anyone can submit/apply. Any submissions you get you're going to have no idea as to how reputable/qualified/credible that candidate is. So how are you going to know who to put forward to these firms?

You're most likely going to end up having to trawl through millions of applications with no data/info on which to judge them.

[ktsmith]

Some people might be able to figure this out before applying but most probably wouldn't as a lot of that type of information isn't publicly available. More importantly, if I can figure out what compensation (equity/salary), travel, work, etc that I can expect from an employer then what in the world do I need hustlebee for? If I've determined all of those things I've probably been in contact with the company already and would be best served by applying directly rather than having some percentage of my potential compensation funneled off to a recruiter.

I'm also confused as to how this will "get an employer's attention without having to do the recruiting dance." This is pretty much exactly what it's like working with any recruiter. You submit your information to the recruiter, the recruiter contacts companies for you or tells you want available jobs there are and then contacts those you are interested in. From the employers side you have relationships with recruiters who send you over resumes and CV's that are supposedly filtered by relevance and qualifications.

Could you clarify why you feel you offer some benefit over other recruiters to both those looking for work and those looking for employees? So far it seems like you are collecting less information and not doing a skills match which is less than most recruiters I've gotten applicants from have done. For the employee you are saying that you just send on the application. Where is the added value outside of the "I'll accept an offer if I get one" checkbox?

[phlux]

How many companies are extending offers and having them turned down?

I have not heard of this being a problem at any company ever.

[rudasn]

From personal experience I would say #3 is a myth. It's reasonable for "success" stories to emerge more often that "failures" not because there are more but because people don't like to talk about it after they failed.