Every candidate read the same way.
Interviews are transcribed and turned into a structured read against the role — the same criteria for everyone, each one quoted from what the candidate actually said. Your panel still makes the call. It just stops making it from memory.
We had a read-heavy path that kept falling over at peak, so I split the write path onto its own service and put a read replica behind a cache — it bought us about eighteen months of headroom.
Today
By the debrief, the first interview was eleven candidates ago
Everyone scribbled different notes against different questions. The strongest impression wins, nobody can point at what was actually said, and when a rejected candidate asks why, there is nothing to show them. The scorecard exists. The evidence behind it does not.
Panel 1 · notes
good energy?
did the caching thing
— ask about scale next time
Panel 2 · scorecard
4 / 5 technical
3 / 5 comms
no comment
Slack, #hiring
strong yes from me
though I only had 25 min
ignore my last message
The same four criteria
Four conversations, filled into one structure
The debrief, before the debrief
Pick a criterion. Read what four people actually said.
- Priya S.Strong
We had a read-heavy path that kept falling over at peak, so I split the write path onto its own service and put a read replica behind a cache — it bought us about eighteen months of headroom.
00:12:04in the transcript - Tomás R.Strong
I'd start by asking what the read-to-write ratio actually is, because sharding a table nobody reads twice is just operational cost. Then I'd look at where the contention is.
00:09:41in the transcript - Wen L.Partial
Honestly the design was handed to me. I owned the rollout rather than the architecture, so I can talk about what broke more than why we chose it.
00:14:22in the transcript - Adaeze N.Strong
We were writing patient events twice, once for audit. I moved audit onto a log-structured store and made the primary path append-only, which killed a whole class of consistency bugs.
00:11:07in the transcript
Every line above is quoted from the interview it came from. Nothing here scores, ranks or screens a candidate out — the panel does that, with the evidence in front of them.
Three steps, and the panel keeps the decision
- 01
Set the role once
The criteria you are hiring against, and the questions every candidate should be asked. One structure for the whole pipeline.
- 02
Run the interview
On video or in the room. It is transcribed with speakers separated, in the language the interview was actually held in.
- 03
Hand the panel evidence
Each candidate against the same criteria, every line traceable to a timestamp — so the debrief argues about what was said.
What it would do
Interview transcription
Speaker-separated and timestamped, for remote and in-room interviews alike, in the language it was held in.
One structure per role
Your criteria, filled in from the interview, in the same shape for everyone in the pipeline instead of six formats.
Evidence you can point at
Every line traces back to a timestamp. Nothing is asserted about a candidate without the sentence it came from.
Coverage check
Which of the role's questions actually got asked — and which interviewer keeps running out of time before the last one.
The decision stays yours
It does not rank, score out or recommend a hire. It produces evidence and structure; your panel does the rest.
Something to show afterwards
A record of what was asked and what was answered, for the debrief, the offer, and the candidate who asks why not.
Pricing we're considering
A hypothesis, not an offer. Part of what we are testing is whether this is priced anywhere near right — nothing is charged, and there is nothing to buy today.
- TeamUS$49per interviewer / month
- Unlimited interview transcription
- Structured read per candidate
- Side-by-side comparison per role
- Talent orgCustomannual, per seat
- ATS export and shared role libraries
- Retention and residency controls
- Onboarding for the whole hiring panel
Hiring at that volume?
Two questions beside your address. They are what tell us whether this is a product or a feature — and whether it is worth building at all.