 Yeah, okay, perfect, great, thanks a lot. Well, welcome to our session for Manager Essentials, focusing on the candidate experience. I think the candidate experience as we start to really grow as an organization is gonna be at the core of everything that we need to be focusing on, given the fact that the landscape has changed throughout the last several years on what candidates are looking for, what candidates are demanding. So a couple of things that we'll focus on as let me go into presentation mode here. And you guys, can you see the slides okay? Yep, okay, great. So looking at the agenda here, we'll quickly look at defining the experience, the importance about a good candidate experience as also what happens if we get it wrong. And then we'll talk about a little bit how hiring managers and recruiting can partner together to really focus on the candidate experience. Then we'll look at some interview best practices and then highlight how they find us and how we find them and then have a conversation, open discussion. And throughout this entire session, please feel free to chime in either on chat or prefer to even have your mic open, it would be preferable as well. So let's look at a quick definition. It starts with them researching our company and as everyone's probably aware, Glassdoor has become the norm where candidates go to review what the company is from a culture standpoint, how people like working there, what people's experiences have been, not only working there, but throughout the interview process. And we'll take a look at some of those a little bit later. But as you start to look at Glassdoor and GitLab in itself from a company perspective has probably one of the best in the industry or even from a company standpoint with a rating of 4.8. But then when you start to look at some of the reviews based on our interviews, it doesn't get so good. So we'll take a look at what some of the candidates are saying and talk about how we can help manage that. And then look at, it continues through every touch point. It's before they interview, it's during their interview and after the interview is the life cycle of the candidate experience. And then it doesn't end after the decision is made. It's the lasting memory of the total experience. So even as they come here and once they're here as an employee, we still gotta make sure that we're manning to that experience and having it be an extremely positive one. So next, I'm just gonna play, I got a couple of videos in here that I'm gonna show you as well. I believe I got to take my headset out for you all to hear it. But this talks about the candidate experience and the importance of it. When it comes to discovering, attracting and retaining the best talent, one thing we should never underestimate is the power of great candidate experience. Because if an employer gets it right, the results can be truly out of this world. And getting it right has never been more important. Competition for talent is reaching astronomical proportions. Candidates are vital beings getting on with their own lives, on their own planet, sometimes far, far away, or so it seems. And those who require their skills often don't know where to find them. But perhaps the right candidates are closer than they think. But even once the prime candidate is found, employers can struggle to understand them fully, which means reaching out to them correctly can be another haphazard mission. It is therefore beneficial to study candidates more closely, their habits, their preferences, their motivations, in order to get to know them better, communicate wisely, and win their trust, ensuring nothing gets lost in translation. This kind of research unearths facts that are critical to securing talent. For example, we know that job seeking is now a 24-7 activity. And with mobile technology, 38% search during their commute, 30% whilst on the job, 18% even admit searching when they're otherwise engaged. And although candidates consult up to 18 different resources throughout their job search, we know that most turn to their friends first for information or advice. So despite technology, word of mouth is still key and reputation speaks volumes. Either way, the candidates' experience will be directly related to new prospects. If this experience has been good, others are more likely to jump on board and referral campaigns can be great for attracting newcomers. But if the experience was bad, this can upset the shift and ties can be severed with competitors gaining advantage. So news travels far and wide and fast. Only 25% of employers regularly request feedbacks from candidates. 78% of job seekers say they've never been asked. This feedback could tell you all you need to know to improve your prospects. Although the world of recruiting has gone nearly 100% digital, the old rules work the best. Listen more, seek feedback, keep things simple, communicate often, set expectations and walk in the candidate's shoes, however different they may be. The journey will be one you'll be glad you made as getting to know your candidates can change your work for the better. So, good, perfect, awesome. Thanks a lot for sitting through that, but there's a lot that can be unpackaged there. And as you can see, things have really changed in the way we view candidates and the way candidates are viewing us. This is a slide that I shared when I did our functional group update, but really think of it as one of our eighth values because it is truly that important for our organization. And it's really gotta be, before the interview, during the interview and after the interview, and it's everyone's responsibility. It's not just recruiting, it's not just the hiring managers, it's us as an entire organization. Just like you look at diversity as everyone's organization, it's not one person's responsibility. And when we start talking about setting clear expectations, I think we do a good job of that within our handbooks and making sure that candidates are understanding what they're coming into when they start interviewing with us, but it's not setting just an expectation in writing it. It's through every step of that process. Once they're done screening with a recruiter, making sure they understand what is that next step gonna be. If they're not moving forward in that process, making sure that they clearly understand that. We are going a 100 miles an hour here, things are gonna fall through the cracks, it's never gonna be perfect, but that means more so than ever we gotta pay more attention to it. And always listen, they always say the customer's right. And sometimes the customer's not always right, but the candidate, if they're not always gonna be right either, but we need to listen to them first. And then obviously be fair and demand accountability. Accountability for us and also accountability for the hiring managers that they have to take ownership in that. These are some characteristics I won't read through them all that of a great candidate experience, but it really is responsible, it's the response and how are we getting back to them. And when I show some of the feedback that we received on Glassdoor, I think we need to take a look and sit back and say, okay, what is it that we're doing today that we need to either iterate on because it might've worked when we were a much smaller organization, but is it gonna be scalable on how we are going about our interviews and throughout our process? And how can we fix each step of the process to make sure it's time back to a great candidate experience? Are there any, I'm gonna take a quick pause, any questions, any comments? No? Okay. Then this might be a quick training session. You know, why focus on a candidate experience? And then also think about what percentage of those prospects or candidates may be our current potential customers. And that's where we wanna make sure that if they're having a good experience here at GitLab, maybe they didn't get the job, but they had a great experience. So they might take that back to their current company or to whatever organization they go and join and then potentially become valuable customers. So this next one is a video. I'm not gonna play the whole thing just a couple of minutes of it. It's actually a mighty Python skit of a bad candidate experience. So you can click and watch the rest of it, but obviously just throw a little humor in there and see what a bad candidate experience could look like. You know, I really enjoy interviewing applicants for this management training course. How is it now? Do you mind just standing up again for one moment? Good morning. Morning. Why do you say good morning when you know perfectly well that it's afternoon? Well, you said good morning. Good afternoon. Oh, yeah. Do you ring bell? Why do you think I ring the bell? This is the interview for the management training course, is it? Yes, yes. I don't think I'm doing very well. Why do you say that? Well, I don't know. Do you say it because you didn't know? So as you can see, not a good candidate experience making him feel uncomfortable. Now, can you hear me? Yeah. I have to plug it in, plug it in the back, okay. Let me just check out some chats here. Let me see how I can get to the chats. Oh, there you go, pick it up, perfect. So as you can see, made him feel very uncomfortable during that interview. And in the way we go about interviews being totally virtual and on video, one thing we want to make sure is that they feel comfortable. Even if, you know, things can happen with technology as everyone knows from clearly, even with my mic. So I want to make sure that we make that candidate feel as comfortable as possible from throughout every step of that process. So I want to throw a couple of snid bits of what I'm not going to obviously read through these. You can take your time and go through them. But this is what candidates are actually saying about us about some of our interviews on Glassdoor. So we want to make sure about the process, making sure it's not too tedious. We're asking candidates before they're even 100% interested in us that we're asking them to take some lengthy assessments, which may not be the right approach, right? We want to get their interest level. We want to make sure that we're interested in them before we're asking them to commit substantial amount of time in investment in us if we're not even making that connection point yet. You know, when we start looking back at the impression, you know, I never heard back from anyone, even when they are going through the process, even though they came back here and interviewed, the fact that we didn't give them a response back is not okay, right? I understand if people are applying and they're being disqualified right at the resume stage, but if we're engaging with them at any step in the process, we need to figure out a better way and more efficient way to get them the proper feedback. And it's not always coming just from the recruiters. Most of the right feedback that we want to get them, the constructive feedback, is going to be coming from the hiring managers. So making sure we hold them accountable to get us that feedback. Well, they completed an assessment, but they didn't pass that assessment. Well, why? Or, you know, they didn't fit our values. Well, why didn't I fit values? Because then they're going to take that feedback and hopefully better themselves, but also make sure that they're not putting remarks out on glass door like this. Any comments to that or questions? No? Okay, I'm going to go to the next slide. Scott, who should provide the candidate feedback? Should it be the recruiter or should it be the hiring manager? Yeah, that's what I was saying. I think it should come from the hiring manager if it got to the hiring manager stage. If it went, you know, if the recruiter disqualified them at their screening stage, then I think it should be the recruiter. But I think the most effective feedback, just like candidates are more responsive, if managers reach out to them initially to try and attract them, I think that's going to be more receptive if they receive authentic feedback from the hiring managers as well. Unless someone disagrees with that. So I'd love to see, you know, as much if not all of the feedback coming from the hiring manager when possible, because even if it's bad news for the candidate, communicated right from the hiring manager is going to make it feel like it was more honest and transparent and they had that connection. So in terms of getting positive referrals and ratings from people who maybe weren't a fit for the role, I think that the more they feel like they were genuinely connected with the hiring manager, the better. I tend to agree because I think the hiring manager can also use it as an opportunity to provide coaching when the right candidates will appreciate and may come back to us in the future. There's always those candidates who aren't interested in feedback and don't want to be better, but we don't really want those people anyway. So I think that investing in people, even if we didn't want to hire them right now, but giving them the feedback they need to maybe come back next year and try again, I think is great if the manager combines them with some of that coaching. Yeah, and then also if the candidate knows why they weren't a fit or were they lacking a certain skill, they'd make him back and say, ah, you know what, actually someone I work with would be a perfect fit skill wise. Why don't I send them over to you? So then you can start getting additional referrals. But if it's just a blanket response from our system that's saying thank you for coming in, we're moving forward, it's not going to get the same effect. So are we, do you provide that immediately? Because I find that some people are just happy to know what the status is of their application. Like, okay, I got the client and I'll move on. And some people do want feedback, but it's better to kind of separate the message from, hey, you're not moving on from, and this is the reason why. Can we, what are we doing? Are we sending the feedback out immediately or do we first say, hey, you've got the client and if you want feedback, please let us know? Yeah, Nani, if you don't mind, I'll throw that over you because you're closer to that and getting that feedback. When do we typically try to get that back to them? At the moment, because of the volume we tend to, especially if it's at screening level, we don't provide feedback, but 90% of candidates will ask and then we do provide feedback or further feedback. I have taken to Bobby's training recently that said, hey, decline right away in the call, it's a lot kinder. So I've started doing that and I do find it a lot more effective and people really take to it. And they even give me feedback in the call then to say, hey, I really appreciate that you were honest. So I actually prefer giving direct feedback in the call. At the moment, from a volume perspective, no, we're sending an email to decline, we're not giving the feedback, but we are following up if we then give further feedback. If the candidate was further in the process, I highly recommend that the hiring manager does the feedback and not us. It's a much better experience. Said as a good example, he always declines all these candidates directly. It doesn't just take pressure of me to try and waffle some excuse of why we don't want to hire the person. It actually gives like a clear answer or a clear direction for the person as to why we're not continuing. I think that you need to use some good judgment. I hear everyone's different and the report levels you build are different and the level of directness and honesty are different. So there's not necessarily a one size fits all to this. This is where we have to understand what kind of connection and relationship we have built with the candidate and what it would be most likely what they would appreciate and respect and would work best for them. I don't think you can say it's gonna be the same for everybody. And I've had different experiences where we decline and then I schedule a meeting for later to offer feedback. I've had candidates who just aren't interested at all in that and I've had some that are very interested. But if I were to climb someone and they were to ask me why, it would be silly for me to say, I'm not gonna tell you that right now. That's gonna be a separate call. It's much more organic if they want details of why that you would have that answer. Otherwise it feels like you're saying no without knowing why you're saying no. So I think that it's important to have your facts straight when you go into that decline in case you are questioned. Don't make it a debate. Don't make it an argument. It's just a matter of here's what our perception is and here's our decision based on that perception. Yeah, and I think there's no one size fits all here. Unfortunately, I had a lot of success with declining people straight in the cold, like Nadia said, people appreciate it and the honesty. But I also had someone recently totally blew up on me when I at the end of the interview, I explained why as it was declined. So it matters a lot. It matters what stage someone is in. Like the further they are along, the harder to blow. What the interview is, is it a video call or in person? In person will be harder. What kind of a pet depends on the person. It depends on the reason for declining. If the person just doesn't have the skill set, like the level of skill that you require, that's gonna be a tougher message than like, oh, you're really good, but we're looking in another dimension. We're looking for, I don't know, public cloud expertise. You don't have that. That's a different message than, look, you're not aware of modern X methods. That might be the truth, but that might be the truth that you don't wanna have at the end of that conversation, but just spread out the interview from the decline from the feedback. And I think in general, for feedback, the rules, people have to be open to it. And a good way to measure that, if they ask for it. And even if 90% asks, I think it's good for us to just wait for it. Because that 10% that don't wanna hear it, it's pretty rough on them if you do provide it unsolicited. Yeah, I agree with that wholeheartedly. The unsolicited is gonna be rough, but it can also, I think, whether solicited or not, it's important that it feel like feedback and be delivered that way, not judgment. And I think that's already a sensitive moment for the candidate and how we deliver that is also important. And I think you need to do it, as if you were talking to a friend of yours who didn't get a role and deliver that in a way that feels like genuine, honest, interested feedback, not judgment. Yeah, and I did a training. I just pushed this in the chat box. I don't wanna hijack spots training here on the whole candidate experience. I think this is probably worthy of its own training on how to give candidate feedback because there are things to avoid and there are things to lean into. I did a training for the recruiting team on this and I think it would make perfect sense for us to do something for the rest of the company as well. So we will add that maybe for our next training that we can go into more detail there on specific candidate feedback, which can be different from current team member performance feedback and things. Hey, Scott, you said we only provide like, we only close the loop if we engage with the candidate. Don't we always also close the loop if they just send in their resume and we never engage? No, no, yeah, absolutely. Yeah, so if we never engage with them, they'll get a response saying that they're not moving through the process or the resume wasn't accepted. That's more of a candid response versus because of the thousands of applications we get. But if we actually have a connection point with them, that's when it needs to be more authentic. Okay, do we have that documented somewhere where they can read it? Like, hey, if you just get a decline based on the resume, we're not going to provide details because we got over 400 applications every day. I'm not sure I can take a look and see and if it's not, we can do a handbook update for sure. Cool. Yeah. We definitely have a template for it and we are using that, especially if it's completely misaligned. Quick example, Barista applying for, now I'm going to wing it, but back in CICD, just using an example. Then we literally send that mail to say, hey, thanks so much, not going to provide further feedback. But yeah, but I think Chloe did do a handbook update. I'm going to try and find it. Okay, great. Thanks, Nadia. Yeah, and as you can see, the recruiting has changed forever. The talent crunch is getting worse. Just today in the US, our unemployment rate went down to 3.9% or 3.8%. So there's a lot more, especially the talent that we're going after, is probably a lot less, probably less than 1% of unemployment for the type of skills that we're going after. I assume that's US-specific, Scott? Yes, yes, the 3.9, that was US-specific, yep. But I think from a skill set perspective, it's probably globally, where there's probably less than 1% with the development staff is my assumption, because it is difficult to find those folks in other geographies as well. Candidates are obviously a lot more informed. They've got choices now. And candidates are picking companies and not vice versa. They're picking us. Yes, we're going out there and going after them. And I always say, go find that passive candidate. Well, with all the social media and tools out there, everyone's really an active candidate because there's so many ways to define information and opportunities. It's just a matter of, are we the right fit for them? And when we start looking at the different workforce that's coming out there with the millennials, they're gonna go out there and they're gonna do job shopping. They're gonna find that company that's gonna make an impact, that's doing things to change the world. So we gotta start, and this kind of ties candidate experience and employment branding kind of ties together in some way, because we need to come up with what's our story, what's our message from an employment brand standpoint that's gonna get candidates excited on what we are doing, because we're doing great things that can change the way people are doing development life cycles that people would get excited about. We just need to get that out, that messaging out there to them. And again, anyone can be found with all their social media out there. It's just a matter of getting the right messaging out there. And then speed is the new currency, right? We gotta move quickly right now. Our average time to fill is right about 56 days. I would like to see that sub 40. There's a lot of steps in our process that I think we can tweak up. And speed is the utmost importance here because we do lose Canada. We can probably pull some stats and I'll have Chloe pull some stats around candidates that are declining our offers, maybe because of the time it took throughout the process. So that is something we definitely need to be cognizant of and see what we can do to help it, not only from a recruiting standpoint, but also with the hiring managers. So we're looking at some tools that might be able to help with that and get it streamlined. And then once the candidate receives an offer letter, we're talking about this in our onboarding committee. How do we keep them engaged? That's not the finish line once they sign that offer letter. There's a period of time to when they still can come back and say, look, I received a counter offer. We've witnessed that this week and a candidate that we were really interested in. We have a couple of candidates that have accepted offers, but they're not starting until August. So we need to figure out how do we keep them engaged? So we're putting some strategies and thoughts together on outreach, not just recruiters doing it, but their managers doing some outreach to them as well to keep them engaged there. Scott, I would chime in on that. I think especially when you're talking about outreach, post offer signing, the managers got to be all over that. That's not recruiting's job. You've gone through this whole process to bring this talent in. You should be, if that person's really got a pretty long timeframe, you're effectively doing onboarding and engagement as you're leading up to that so they can hit the ground running. But that's the most important retention period. It is super critical. And a super critical once they start to, I heard a story recently about a candidate starting in Europe who didn't hear from their manager at all in their whole first week. Not acceptable, right? We've got to be more hands-on than that. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. So next kind of tying candidate experience into the recruiting and hiring manager partnerships, one thing, we're very reactive throughout our process. Now, a vacancy gets open, it gets out there posted, and then we wait for people to apply. I call it the post-and-pray model. We want to shift that in paradigm to be 100% direct sourcing, but there's got to be a real good partnership. And it starts with the job description and making sure that we're not just receiving a job description. The recruiters are reaching out to that hiring manager and having what I call an intake call. So they truly understand what it is that they're going out there looking for. What are the right industry titles? We've done some iteration on it, some of our titles that might not be what other organizations are calling them. So we're never going to find that candidate. So that's an iteration that we have to look at. What are other companies calling this position? Even though we might have a different internal title, the external posting title might be something we need to help attract that talent. And then what is our strategy from just posting versus sourcing? And develop an outreach strategy that lays out different events and not have conferences and all that. We don't do a lot of that, but we should be getting out there to some of these conferences that have that talent. And I'm not familiar with all of them, probably some of the hiring managers are, where we know these debat folks or SDRs might be going to so we can get a presence and get our messaging out there. And then schedule update meetings, not just have an intake hall and we just start working on the REC. We need to be from a recruiting team, we need to be more proactive at partnering with the hiring manager and giving them regular schedule update calls. If they're weekly, bi-weekly, whatever they may be to make sure that we're all still aligned because more so than not, RECs tend to morph over their life cycle. What it was today, and we've interviewed some candidates through calibration exercise or whatever it may be, could be a little bit different tomorrow or next week. So making sure that we're still staying aligned or if we're continuing to get candidates that are being declined by hiring managers, have a net recalibration exercise and say, okay, here's what I'm seeing in the job description. It seems like you're looking for something a little bit different. So that's something that we have to start working on a little bit more as well. And then our participation, like I said, discovery meeting, ongoing touch base meetings, pre-brief meetings before the interview, making sure that we've got the right candidate or the right interview team lined up. Everyone knows clear expectations and then trying to get them through that process as smoothly and with the best experience possible. Hey, Scott, quick question. Are there processes right now where, well, I mean, you guys answer yes, because I've been a part of some of them, that we go ahead and begin interviewing without having the meeting and the pre-brief prior to interviews? Yeah. Is that the exception or is that more common? So I would say that the pre-briefs aren't happening. We're being more reactive. I think we're getting recs thrown to us and we're just posting them and then start and manage the candidate pool from there. But I think we need to be more proactive that having those pre-brief meetings with the hiring manager and debrief meetings, right? Once we've gone through a selection of interviews, we wanted pre-brief, here's the candidates that we've interviewed this week or interviewed over the past two weeks. Let's have a discussion on who we're moving forward with on the next step. Yeah, it feels like that could just be a gate, right? You don't get to post the job until we've had the pre-brief meetings or you don't get to these start interviews. We won't schedule any interviews until we've had that. Yeah. And make sure that that's a priority. This is so important for a manager. You should absolutely have the time and interest to make sure that happens quickly to keep everyone on the same page. Yeah, thank you for that, absolutely. So, let us help you as the hiring managers. What is the target population? You're living and breathing the skills and working with the technology. So during those pre-brief flights, it's important to say, okay, what are the competitors we want to go after or don't want to go after or who's hands off? When we do executive search briefings, we have those discussions. Who should we go after? Who shouldn't we? Because they're a customer and we don't want to rock that boat. What are obviously, what are the software and technologies, industry deal names? What are the soft skills? Yes, we have a culture within GitLab, but that's not just about soft skills. It's what's the culture or the skills that the hiring manager is gonna have that we can match up with the right candidate? Because it's more importantly, it's having that right culture mix with that specific manager versus the country and making sure that they're gonna be able to work good together. And then obviously looking at employer referrals, that should be the first question we ask before we ever post-direct, is what employer referrals, what referrals do you have? Who should we reach out to your network? Even if you don't have specific relationships with them, point us in the right direction. I think we've made some great strides over the past couple of months with doing source-a-thons where we actually sit there with the hiring managers and look at your profiles online and do calibration. And then they'll say, go out there and reach it. Even the executive staff has done that. And we'll take that list and go out there. So we need to make sure that's happening on a regular basis and not just for a one-off rack, but make sure we're doing that on a consistent basis. And then I just threw some interview best practices here. You can read them at your own leisure, but I think one thing I wanna focus here is looking at the way and there is a handbook update where we're trying to get, and I think you think of it as going to an onsite interview, right? If you're going to an onsite interview, you're gonna meet with several people during that day. You might come back maybe one other time, but right now we've got time slots where a candidate might stretch out a week or two. Let's try and make it so it's a better experience where we carve out, we leave their setups in interview days, or we do a couple panel interviews, which we've seen to be very successful, at least on my recruiting team, we've done those, as well as maybe back to back. Let's carve out two hours out of the candidate's day to have interviews with a couple higher managers. So at the end of that day, the recruiter and the higher manager can partner up and say, okay, you interviewed so-and-so candidate, are we moving forward to the next step? Or even a couple candidates in a day and then make a decision at the end of the day? Yeah, I think this is super important, Scott. I think that in the past I've been at companies that prioritize interviewing as talk to all other meetings. And to me, that can be even more possible at GitLab because we talk about our meetings being asynchronous and making sure that people in different times those can participate. I also think that can apply to if right now I could have been interviewing a candidate instead of being part of this training, I could have still watched this training and I still could have gotten access to the content. But I couldn't necessarily get back to that candidate. And if we make candidates wait too long in the interview process or it feels too broken up and not fluid, it's not a great candidate experience. I think we need to do more to prioritize interviews in our schedules when we have important roles to fill. I agree, I think one of the constraints that the traditional onsite interview process at traditional companies is a benefit because someone's flying in or driving in, you sort of have to make sure you get all the interviews done. And so of course, everyone seems to find the time and you make good use of their time, but you also can communicate really efficiently across the team. I also think when you do those blocks, it's a little bit easier to make sure that you stack up the responsibilities for each of the interviews. But the interviewer has a different responsibility so that they're not getting the same interview questions over and over again. If you are coordinating a series of two or three or four, obviously you're not gonna wanna make that candidate after the same thing four times. I think that we probably are a little bit less disciplined about that when they've got four over four weeks. Each person starts setting their own agenda for the interview. Yeah, and the candidate starts forgetting about what they've already covered. The managers can stop forgetting, wait, I saw a candidate I really liked last week. Were they better than this one or not? It's been a while. I had to go back and review my notes. It's just the doing things in a tight timeframe, I think is super important when it comes to hiring. Yeah, absolutely. So during the interview, just a couple of things, obviously interview etiquette, making sure that we're making them feel comfortable, making sure that we are prepared as well with what we wanna be asking as far as questions and prepared to, you know, prepared to talk about values, talk about GitLab as well as the position. And then like I said, we just talked about managing the interview, making sure that it's clearly defined and then setting the right expectations. That is the most important is making sure that we're setting those expectations. And even if we say, look, this interview process might take a couple of weeks and you're gonna interview three or four different people over a period of time. If we set that expectation, it goes a lot further than just waiting and assuming something is gonna happen. And then the selection process profile, obviously profile match, skills, culture match. I think we do a really good job with the culture fit, making sure that career goals align and then obviously the technical skills. And then the rest is just, this is how they find us, this is how we find them with the tools that we've got internally. And we're starting to look at other ways on how we can reach out to folks and how we can engage with them. Cause it's more about engagement than outreach. We can find people as to how do we engage with them. And then so right now we're currently using as our technology, obviously lever, as everyone knows, LinkedIn. We've recently pushed out a broad campaign, well, job posting campaign and as well as ad impressions, which has generated tons of activity. I think it was last week we had upwards of 3000 applications. And one thing going back to the Glassdoor review and I saw stat, I think it was 90% of the people before they apply to a job go on Glassdoor to read the reviews. So just think about that, 90% of those 3000 actually went and looked at our reviews before they applied. So now that puts pressure on the recruiting team because now we've got to manage that flow and make sure we manage that experience because if there's applications that are not getting reviewed, we need to get communication back to them on why they weren't fit or if they're gonna move forward. And then we use Stack Overflow as well to engage with candidates. And then we're also using some diverse sites as I mentioned up here, like Power to Fly and some others. So open discussion. I know we only got a couple of minutes left. Is there anything else you wanna cover or discuss, debate, anything? Scott, can we go back to slide number five? Slide number five. I don't have the numbers here to say but when was that? Career experience, the trash truck. Oh, the trash truck, okay, yeah. So someone correctly pointed out that it will be our seventh value candidate experience since we have six values. But I don't think you should think of it as a separate value. I think you should see candidate experience in the light of our current values. So our values are collaboration and that means not treating the candidate as someone on an equal level, not as some pawn that we're moving around, but a future colleague and someone we should treat even better than our current colleagues. It's about getting results but at the end finding the right person. It's about efficiency, not only for us but also for the candidate. Not letting someone know that their state changed is these people hanging, these people wondering, they can't move on to the next thing that they can close it off in their head. So that's not efficient for them. It's about diversity and attracting a broad range of candidates and making sure that our filters don't discriminate unfairly. It's about iteration. I'm not sure how to weave iteration into it and the last value is transparency. It's about letting the candidate know what states are at and if they want feedback, give them that feedback and give it in a way that's actionable for them. No, thank you for that, Sid. That spot on, I think, yes, and I'm not sure where I got eight from but we'll change that for sure. But yeah, you're weaving it in and again, that's kind of, maybe it's to the core of our values. Candidate experience can be at some of the core of those. Thanks. Anyone else? I think to add to Sid's, I think value's point is it definitely is within our values and really every manager should be thinking about this as a customer experience. We're trying to delight each of these candidates because obviously, hopefully whichever one we select, we want to accept but all the others might be future candidates or certainly referrals to other future candidates. So we should be thinking about this as how do I get through this process and select somebody? It's how do I really make this a delightful experience and if we were to follow up with a survey to each of these candidates, they'd say, yeah, it was actually a great experience and I actually really liked, they wouldn't say that guy who interviewed me. It's like, Mike, I really enjoyed the conversations with Mike and I want to keep in touch with him. When I decline a candidate and they send me a LinkedIn request and want to keep in touch for the future and want to grab coffee someday, that's a good sign that we had a good process. God, just out of curiosity, we've been really highlighting referrals in our team calls. We've been trying to ask for those. How has that gone? Are we being successful at making every team member feel like they're a scout for this company looking for the best talent or is there more we need to do there? I think there's more we can do there and I think with pulling referral programs, it all starts out to making sure that we are reaching out to that referral and I did a survey back in Northrop Grumman days and asked, what can we do to improve the employee referrals? And some people came back all for more money but it was like less than 1%. But most of the response were, just reach out and consider my referral. Even if there's not a job today, there may be one tomorrow. I think we need to do that more often. But again, I think that's something that we need to prioritize, right? Because we're moving so fast trying to hire so many people but I think our messaging needs to be better to our employee population and how to refer people and then where are the referrals within the process? Have they been reached out to? Are they being interviewed? And I think there's ways that we can use our tools to be able to do that. Yeah, I totally agree. If there's referrals that we're not following up on, that's obviously a big mess, not only for the person that referred them but for us a referral is presumably filtered through someone that we already trust their judgment so that that should get a pretty good look. Yeah, and not I'm reaching out to the referral but the person that referred them and just saying, hey, I reached out to them. Doesn't seem like they're fit for what we've got here today. Love to keep them within our pool for our other future opportunities but thank you for that referral, keep them coming. Anything else? Well, thank you everyone for your time. This is my first training session I've done in a long, long time. So hopefully it was valuable value add to you. And if there's other things you wanna discuss around this, please feel free to reach out to me anytime. Thanks, Scott. Thanks all.