 Okay, so it's now time to start. Thanks so much for joining everyone. As most of you probably know, since I interviewed most of you or you've been around a while, I'm Sasha, I just wanna make sure I introduce myself. I'm the recruiter part of the employment team at GitLab. And so today we're gonna do the functional group update for PPLOPs with a focus on employment and the current hiring. I wanna talk a little bit about all of the activities that we've done in Q1 and Q2. Just give you guys a general update about how things have been going in employment and then show some opportunities that we have, some places that we can work on, share with you the current state of the candidate experience, the time to hire and time to fill for current roles. If you don't know those terms to worry, I'll go over those a little bit. So to start, I just wanted to share what our applicant pipeline looks like. And so this is for all of 2017 so far, we've had a total of 4,213 applicants. So that's for every position that has been posted up to this point. And actually this is accurate as of yesterday. So we definitely have more applicants today than yesterday. But there are some numbers here that I wanna go over and just, I think are really important so that you can see how awesome GitLab is and how we have been attracting some really great candidates. So the total number of applicants in 4,213, like I said, and only 13% of those make it to the phone screen. So that's the first initial conversation with me. Now at that point, that's when an applicant turns from just someone who sends an applicant to an actual candidate in the pipeline. That happens at the phone screen, that means they're actually in consideration. So I may talk about applicants versus candidates in this presentation and that's how you know the difference. So only 13% even make it to the phone screen. That's incredible. We have really done a lot of work to filter out a lot of unqualified people, but that's still a lot of resumes that we're reviewing every single day to get to those 562. And then those are 562 phone screens, like 45 minute interview calls that we're doing with people. So there's still a lot of time being spent actively screening people. But then you can sort of see how it drops off after that. So we're basically cutting in half after each level of interview. So we have a phone screen with 562 people and then we reduce that by only 42% of those people make it to first interview and 46% of those make it to second interview. After second interview, it really like drops off. We stop losing people by half because we're really filtering down to the people that we want to bring on board and we want to hire. But I did want to point out that 49 people have been hired into 2017. I think that number might be a little bit low. Maybe not exactly accurate. I think we're closer to 51, just over the past couple of days. But only 1% of people who are applicants actually get hired at Gillab. So this is a really competitive environment and this is a lot, a lot of applicants. So I wanted to share with you just a little bit what it is looked like by month. So in January, after the holidays, it's very normal for the number of applicants to go down. Excuse me, people are recovering from holidays and stuff like that. So we had only 636 after a couple of really, really high months, like 850 both in November and December. But then we went shot right back up in February. March was pretty high as well. There was a solid dip in April, but that's because we closed a lot of rolls and filled a lot of rolls in April. So that is a normal correspondence. And you can see in May, we shot right back up to 890. And partially that's because we opened a second recruiter role again. That has been a very active and popular role, but unfortunately we haven't been able to fill it. In June, we have 693 and I anticipate by the end of the month, like by the end of this week, we'll be really close to 800 applicants again. So we're really steady about the 800 applicants a month mark. And just to give you guys an idea, like at three minutes per interview, if you're gonna review, I'm sorry, three minutes per resume, if you're gonna review every single resume, that's like nine hours a week. So we're getting tons and tons of applicants, which is awesome. And just so you know, I see all of your questions coming in and I will go through and if I don't address them in the course of this, I will certainly address them at the end. Okay, so candidate pipeline. Just wanted to show you a little bit what our current active pipeline looks like. On the left, those are all the roles that are currently open. And these bars represent number of active candidates, so people who are actively being considered. Like I said, this was just updated as of yesterday. So we just opened Federal Solutions Architects, so we don't have any applicants for it yet, but we'll certainly change that. You can see we have a lot of really good interest in most of our roles. But then on the right, you can see, okay, how many positions are open by division. Development has by far the most open positions. A lot of those are production engineers, security specialists. I'm going to use this opportunity to plug myself and say, if you know any of these people, if you see an open role right now and you know someone who would be a really great fit, please consider reaching out to them and letting them know that we do have these positions open. So that's just a snapshot of our current pipeline, lots of active candidates. So we have tons of candidates, and right now we're not doing much to go out and find the best ones. We just don't have the bandwidth. There's, like I said, only one recruiter right now, and we don't have enough manpower, frankly, to go out and actively source the best passive talent. So all these candidates pretty much are coming to us organically, either through word of mouth. Many people come through GitLab.com and I wanted to take a second to share with you like just a little anecdote. More than any other particular reason, people cite the database incident as the reason they've applied to GitLab. So way to make lemonade out of lemons. I would say I've had over 50 individuals say that they heard about GitLab because of the DV incident and that is the reason, how we handled it is the reason that they applied. So really amazing. I don't think you see that very often and so that's a huge, huge reflection of the company and the transparency. As everyone knows, we do post on Hacker News. We get a lot of activity that way. We are also starting to be more active on social media. We're posting all of our roles on Twitter. Please feel free to retweet to like any of those tweets. Any activity and traffic that we have on those gets us more attention. I posted, this is actually a hyperlink so you can click on social media and sort of see how many clicks each of our posts is getting and how much attention we're getting. We sometimes make note when someone really notable who has a lot of followers retweets us, we want more of that activity on social media. So please like share all of our jobs. I also wanna remind everyone that there is a referral program. I linked to it in the handbook. There's a referral incentive. So again, if you know anyone who fits this, any of our open roles, please share them with me. You can email me directly or you can just have them apply online and add you as a referral. Some things we've tried to do like outwardly though to gain the attention of candidates is going to like more unlikely places like Slack communities started posting our roles on Reddit. We are actively looking on Stack Overflow. We have a jobs page and jobs posting on Stack Overflow, Power to Fly and LinkedIn. I went over LinkedIn a little bit last week in a team call, but I'm gonna talk about it a little bit more today. So this Q1 and Q2 of 2017, I've primarily been focused on candidate experience and making sure we have the best candidate experience possible. It's really hard to do because we're short staffed and short handed, but we're doing a really good job of staying high touch and staying visible, especially at the individual contributor level. So you can see our average time to hire in 2017 has been 43 days. And what that means is from the time a person enters and applies with us enters the pipeline to the time they actually are hired is 43 days. So that's 14 days more than the average. So we definitely have some room to grow there and I have ideas of how to improve that process, but it's gonna take a lot of work both from the hiring manager side, the interviewing team side and our side making a better process. The goal is to get that to be down at least on par with the industry average. However, even with the long interview time or average time to hire, our MPS score is pretty good. So we do a post interview survey for declined candidates and we started doing it a little bit late in Q1. So we haven't captured all of the 562 people who have been through the pipeline, but of those in Q1, we got an average MPS score of 4.0. So if you don't know the MPS question is, how likely are you to recommend applying with GitLab to a friend or a colleague? And so five is the best means, yes, I'll definitely recommend you. One is the worst, like absolutely not, I'm not gonna do it ever. So in Q1, we got some critical feedback. We scored a 4.0 that was pretty good for our first time measuring. And we did even better in Q2. We took that feedback and try to make some actionable changes and overall our scores of 4.1, we definitely have room to improve, but it's pretty impressive that candidates are coming back to us at all after being declined and saying, hey, yeah, I would still recommend your organization to my friends. Okay, so we're on to the hiring forecast. This hiring forecast is a link. You can see this internal document. This is just an internal document and it is showing our planned hires and replacements for the year. So if you're curious about how your team may grow and what is on the docket, I think you can go in there and look, but managers have the ability to comment and edit whenever they're proposing new roles that are not in the forecast. You just go and plop your position down in there and ping Paul so that he understands that you're requesting approval for an additional role. And then that's really how we get the ball rolling on adding positions. Okay, so this is primarily for managers. We have updated the vacancy requisition process. So if you are intending to add a new role, please go to this link. Again, the title is the link and read what it is like now to open a role. It's going to be changing a little bit as we update the backend of the jobs page and make it a careers page. But for now, basically you decide you want to open a role, you check with your agency member, give the thumbs up, maybe get the thumbs down, who knows. If you get the thumbs up, write a job description if one doesn't already exist and submit a merger quest or you can even add it to a Google doc and I'll make a merger request for you. Then you add your role to a vacancy requisition document which is linked in the handbook and ping both your people ops business partner and Paul or Sid. So they're the ones who will have final approval. So people ops approves, check you get your role, the CEO or the CFO approves and the job goes live. I will take that information, I will review your job description, I will make sure everything looks good and has appropriate approval and we have a benchmark for the salary set so that the compensation calculator works and then the vacancy will go live. Okay, so our last big push here lately has been getting us up to date on LinkedIn implementation. So we have just really launched a GitLab page on LinkedIn and already we are seeing tremendous traffic. It's been really successful and it's only been live for a week and a half. These numbers are from last week, excuse me. We have eight jobs or we've had eight jobs posted on LinkedIn and those eight jobs alone have had 2,500 views in two weeks. That's incredible. 451 apply clicks, obviously all of those apply clicks didn't turn into applications but we're getting really amazing traffic and part of that is because we have this new life tab which gives people insight into what it's like to work at GitLab. I wanna take a moment to request that if you have LinkedIn, please make sure that if you feel comfortable adding GitLab as your place of employment and then sharing our updates. The sales team, I'm gonna give you guys a shout out. You guys are amazing at sharing the blog posts and everything if other people would start to do that especially in our development departments. We'll start to attract attention from the people, the engineers and the community that we want to apply. So how we compare on the right side of the screen to our competitors, we're pretty low. We don't have that many followers and so this is a huge push for me personally. I wanna make sure we're up into the tens of thousands by the end of the year because there's no reason that we shouldn't be. Docker and GitHub and Slack aren't doing anything more interesting on LinkedIn than we are, so it really is gonna be a community effort from all of the GitLab employees. Okay, so just to identify, like I said, some opportunities for Q3 and Q4, moving forward we definitely need to add some resources to the employment team. We need to streamline our process and make sure that the candidate experience is more high touch and that we're communicating effectively and setting people's expectations from the very beginning. We're gonna start outbound sourcing for all roles because everyone knows that the best talent is usually passive. They're not the ones outlooking, they have to sort of be coaxed into coming over and so we wanna really make a concerted effort using all of the amazing tools that we already have to bring people on board. And then there's some things down the line creating a standardized interview process and rating system so that we make sure that it's very uniform and we're giving everyone a very fair chance for measuring people against each other in an appropriate way. And lastly is in limiting a new applicant tracking system because the one that we have now is functional but it isn't the best and there's a lot of missed opportunity because we're not appropriately tracking data and we're lacking some functionality that would really, really help us in the long run out of an applicant tracking system. So those are all the updates I have for you and I am going now into questions. Okay, so from Yolve out of curiosity, how many calls do I do a day that's hilarious and it really depends it's usually between four and eight 45 minute screening calls a day, 30 to 45 minute screening calls. So it's a lot from Jim would be really interesting to see one more level down to offers written versus accepted. Yeah, actually that's a great point. I can definitely get that information for us and publish it. We do have a very low decline rate for offers but I'm happy to share that information if I can pull it out of the ATS. Okay, meant yes, the VP of engineering role is being handled by a third party and yes, that's why it's zero because we cleared out everyone that we had internally and we're sending people over to our recruiting partner for that. Okay, is this recording going to be shared publicly? Yes, I believe so. And if so people applying for product manager and support engineer would know they're the only ones left. Oh, I see, I see, well, that's true but we get so many applicants every day that that could change in a minute. So I don't think any worries there. From Marin, LinkedIn is super spammy if you're a developer, that is true and we're absolutely gonna make a concerted effort to not be spammy. I've had a lot of success recruiting from LinkedIn in the past and the roles that are really highly effective using LinkedIn are like manager and above. So I think that's where we should focus our efforts not necessarily on engineering. That's why we have tools like Stack Overflow but there is a way to be personable and not a robot on LinkedIn that will get you some responses. So we do not intend to be spammy on LinkedIn and if you have any concerns, please come to me. I love seeing things that recruiters have sent out in the past. Definitely is a way to know what not to do. Joe, great question. What is our average cost for hire? Not calculated yet, but we know it's a lot. I mean, obviously with our average time to fill and the average time that a position is open, it's high. We have not calculated that. Dimitri, is our salary calculator and handbook clearly referenced on the GitLab LinkedIn page? Our salary calculator is not. Our handbook and remote work manifesto are. They're very clearly linked. The salary calculator is obviously an important tool but I'm not sure that we necessarily want to link to it directly from LinkedIn. Okay, and Elshad, maybe I missed it but will you post all the jobs on our LinkedIn page? We pay per job opening on LinkedIn so we only pay for six openings at the moment because they're very expensive. So right now, Louis and I are working to sort of trade out the roles as soon as we've gotten enough traffic. You can trade out roles or jobs as frequently as you want. So eventually, yes, every role will be posted but probably not all simultaneously. It would be exorbitantly expensive to have all 25 roles posted at once on LinkedIn. Can I just ask another question related to that, Sasha? All the jobs that are currently listed are San Francisco based so it might be a good idea if we can... That's a great point. ...from different continents to show that we're truly global. That's a great point. We're actually working with LinkedIn right now because they haven't worked with a company like us before and they forced us to put a location binder around it and so they auto-set based on our location as a company. So our headquarters is San Francisco. We are working with them, they're working with us to try to make that more varied and be actually just all remote roles. I'd love to hear any suggestions. We thought about putting remote in the title for each position that was listed but right now, LinkedIn doesn't have a great solution for that. I hear what you're saying and I'll absolutely adjust some of the roles to different locations. Sasha, I think the most important thing is to show that they're not just San Francisco because that's what people assume. So San Francisco would be like the worst thing to have in there. Okay. I think if we just make it the greatest location on earth like Antarctica or something like that and then put remote in the title and people will be like, what? And Antarctica and then they'll, oh, it's remote. Okay, that's why they put in. So then people understand it. Yeah, the only trouble with that is that a lot of times candidates are suggested roles based on their location. I get it, but we actually wanna be a diverse company. So having San Francisco in there is not helping. Absolutely. Yeah, I need to think through it. I need to think through it. So it's a great point to raise. I definitely want to think through this and maybe we spread them around into really random locations. So one job is listed in Arkansas and one job is listed in Sarajevo. But those things seem realistic and we're not gonna, we're hiring from 38 countries. So it's not gonna add much. The thing to solve this just make it very unrealistic. Okay. I need to think on a good solution, but yeah, I understand. The North Pole. North Pole. I don't know if I can list the North Pole. I know North Pole or South Pole. North Pole or South Pole. Or we could do something really exotic like a very remote island somewhere. But I think North Pole or South Pole is like Santa Claus. Like it's so unrealistic, people will get it. Good, yeah. Okay, so moving on to Dmitri's next question, which is, are we advertising on authentic jobs? I've heard it's a high traffic job word. So right now we don't necessarily have a problem with traffic, inbound traffic. And we've definitely posted on some of the free high traffic boards before. And what ends up happening is that we're inundated. We need to be really selective about where we post our roles because it can be detrimental to have too many applicants who are unqualified. So for instance, we were posting previously on Indeed and we got hundreds of applicants for a single role and none of the candidates were qualified. So I'm happy to look into authentic jobs. We are listed on a lot of remote working sites like Digital Nomad, Remote OK. We work remotely, we've paid to be on before. And then Jobspresso. So those are some very active boards that we frequently come up on. Also virtual jobs, so great. Are there any other questions? Anybody else? I hope I answered your question. I have another question for you. You mentioned that it takes us 14 days more than industry average to do a hire. Does that take into account that we are a remote only company? No, and that's a really great point to bring up and something that I meant to mention. So that is across the board for in-person, mostly people doing in-person interviews. Part of the reason that we are 14 days longer is that we are more thorough, in my opinion, in selecting our candidates. We have to be really sure that the person is going to be a sustainable producer in this environment. And I think that takes a lot more virtual chats and it's up to people's calendars and the candidates themselves schedule out whenever is available for them. Since it's not going to one brick and mortar building and having all interviews in one day, it tends to take a little bit longer. So I haven't had a ton, especially in Q2. I haven't had a ton of people really complaining about the length of the interview process. People seem to really understand and be motivated to join the company despite the length of the process. But it's very difficult to compare us to other remote only companies because there are so few. Any other questions? Just an idea again about the job titles. Maybe we could just put the region that the job base is in, in the job title on LinkedIn, to have SDR, North America SDR, EMEA and the same with. The one problem I see with that is that if we did that with regions and we posted SDR with the title for each region that it's open, then that would use three of our six slots. So we would have to rotate through them. So it's a thinker, but we'll get there. We'll definitely get there. Thanks for bringing it up. Elsha, I think it's really important. Okay. Is there any other questions? Going once, going twice? If not, thank you guys so much for joining. I appreciate it. And if you have any questions, feel free to post them in P-Pots.