[reledi]

> hidden talent; those good at doing a job but bad at getting one

I really like this. If you're bad at getting a (good) job then employers safely assume you would also be bad at the job - it's too risky otherwise. But often that isn't the case, because there's a lot of "hidden talent".

What can we do to give those people a fair chance? We need effective ways to discover hidden talent. The process you described worked for you, but it doesn't seem practical. Too time consuming for both the employer and job seekers, and not rewarding enough for those who don't get a job out of it.

[namelezz]

Are there ways to help those talents get together and start their own companies? Otherwise, they may go to interviews and keep getting rejected.

[reledi]

That's a possibility worth exploring, especially with services like https://assembly.com popping up. Starting a company is still a huge risk compared to being an employee though, and a good employee might not make a good entrepreneur.

[Retra]

Do you think those people who are not good at selling themselves are going to be good at convincing people to buy their stuff?

[dllthomas]

That depends on why they're bad at selling themselves. For instance, if they get ridiculously self-conscious when the conversational focus is on them, that shouldn't get in the way of selling something else.

[owennoah]

Hi, I'm Noah and I head BD for Better Work World, the organization I have started with Brooke to help firms hire the way he did. As for the above comment, this is true but the larger point is that, if the job isn't explicitly a sales position or doesn't require gaining internal agreement (like, say, many managerial roles)`one's ability to sell one's self in an interview is somewhat irrelevant, wouldn't you agree? Think about it: if you are a coder and happen to have several social anxiety issues, you would probably be an awful interview. But who cares? The market for coders is so hot it seems that has been largely accepted, albeit implicitly, but for less hot positions, not so much. We believe candidates win and hiring managers win when you focus on getting people to DO the work as opposed to talk about doing the work. When Brooke hired this way he found people he would have never hired through reviewing resumes, so thats a win for both of them, and those whom he did not hire-- many of whom had been unemployed-- would usually quickly find jobs elsewhere because they were given the opportunity to do relevant work, network, etc. To me, that beats the standard, "what's your biggest weakness?" line of questioning any day of the week.