This is a recording of a live session from the GTM ANZ Community, featuring Cameron Morgan (Head of Recruitment, Pointer Strategy) and Ricky Pearl (Founder, Pointer Strategy).
What Is a Hiring Day?
A hiring day is exactly what it sounds like: you bring all your shortlisted candidates into a room for a single full-day assessment. Group exercises in the morning, cut the field at lunch, one-on-ones in the afternoon, and job offers by end of day.
It replaces the traditional multi-week, multi-stage interview process with a compressed, high-energy event. Pointer has run these for clients hiring anywhere from 4 to 10 people in a single day.
"One day. You bring everyone into a room, full day interview process. Halfway through the day, you let half the people go home. By the end of the day you hand out job offers to everyone you want." — Cameron Morgan
The critical distinction: speed isn't the goal — alignment is. You're not just moving faster. You're getting context you simply cannot get from one-on-one interviews.
Why Hiring Days Work
Better Decisions Through Better Context
The single biggest advantage is what you learn by putting candidates side by side in the same environment. Traditional interviews show you how someone performs in a 30-minute conversation. Hiring days show you how they collaborate, lead, follow, handle pressure, and treat the people around them.
"Every single time we've done this, we've ended up picking different people to who we originally suspected." — Ricky Pearl
One example from a recent hiring day: the most polished candidate — Pointer's top pick going in — displayed subtly problematic behaviour during group exercises, delegating tasks to a female colleague in a way that raised concerns. The hiring manager's verdict: *"We are not starting with those problems. This is an absolute no."* That insight would never have surfaced in a standard interview.
Near-Zero Churn
SDR roles traditionally have high turnover. But across all hiring days Pointer has run, churn has been near zero. Only one person left (around month eight or nine, due to personal circumstances). The shared experience of the hiring day creates team cohesion from day one — before the team even officially exists.
Higher Offer Acceptance Rates
Candidates who commit a full day have already bought in. They've experienced the leadership, engaged with the product through exercises like mock cold calls and ICP mapping, and they can see themselves in the role. By the time an offer is extended, the psychological commitment is already made.
"There's this real buzz, this real energy of all the people in the room vying for the same position. They're getting real leadership insights. They're starting to really see themselves in this role." — Cameron Morgan
Everyone Starts Together
Because all offers go out on the same day, you can align start dates. That means:
"Having everyone start at the same time — that was probably the biggest time saving in all of this. The hiring manager could come to one one-hour session about the company as opposed to doing that 10 times for every new hire." — Ricky Pearl
The Real Time Economics
There's an illusion that hiring days save time overall. They don't — they redistribute it.
| Traditional Process | Hiring Day | |
|---|---|---|
| Hiring manager time | 24+ hours (interviews, admin, coordination) | ~8 hours (one day, with breaks) |
| Recruiter/coordinator time | Moderate, spread over weeks | Heavy, compressed upfront |
| Total elapsed time | 4-8 weeks | 1-2 weeks (prep + event) |
| Decision quality | Based on siloed 1:1 impressions | Based on observed group dynamics |
The hiring manager's time is slashed. In a recent 24-candidate process, what would have been three full days of first-round interviews alone — plus second rounds, coordination, and admin — became a single day. And during exercises where they weren't directly involved, they could catch up on other work.
When Hiring Days Work Best
When They Break Down
"If you haven't come to it well prepared, it's just a shit show." — Ricky Pearl
One real trade-off: you will lose good candidates. Not everyone can make the day. Some strong candidates simply can't commit to a full-day event on a specific date. Plan for a secondary hiring round to catch anyone who slipped through.
Structuring the Day
Morning: Group Exercises
Start with group-based exercises to quickly identify standout and underperforming candidates. The exercises are designed with layers — the stated objective might be one thing, but you're actually assessing something else entirely.
"Every exercise we do has a whole lot of strategy and undertones. What we are assessing them on is always quite different to the objective of the exercise." — Ricky Pearl
For example, a task framed as testing product knowledge might really be about observing who takes the lead, who follows, who's too pushy, and who contributes meaningfully without dominating.
Lunch: The Hidden Assessment
Never underestimate lunch. How candidates order, coordinate, treat staff, include others — this is where the mask slips. Who notices the person sitting alone and invites them in? Who coordinates the table? Who says thank you?
"Lunch for me is always where I'm switched on. That's the piece where I'm looking for the clues." — Ricky Pearl
Afternoon: Cut and One-on-Ones
At lunch, make the cut. Release candidates who clearly aren't right — respectfully, because you're not here to waste their time either. The afternoon cohort is now half the size, making meaningful one-on-one time feasible.
One powerful technique in those one-on-ones: ask finalists who else in the room should (or shouldn't) be on the team. In Pointer's last hiring day, four out of seven finalists flagged the same candidate as a poor culture fit — someone who was on the hiring shortlist.
"Four people all mentioned one person that was on our list to hire. We had to dig in — what have they all seen that we've missed?" — Ricky Pearl
End of Day: Offers
Offers go out before candidates leave. They've already pre-accepted (you've resolved all questions during pre-screening). The energy is high, the experience is fresh, and there's no week-long gap for doubt to creep in.
The Pre-Work That Makes It All Possible
The hiring day itself is the tip of the iceberg. The heavy lifting is in:
Key Takeaways
Your Speakers
Cameron Morgan is Head of Recruitment at Pointer Strategy. He's designed and run hiring days across multiple industries, from startup blitzes to enterprise assessment centres.
Ricky Pearl is the Founder of Pointer Strategy, where he's worked with 200+ GTM teams in APAC on strategy, hiring, and implementation.
<details>
<summary><strong>Full Transcript</strong></summary>
Ricky Pearl: Today Cam and I are going to be discussing hiring days. It's something that we've done multiple times for our clients. Always interesting, very interesting way to hire, particularly when hiring lots of people at once or building teams holistically. We thought we'd discuss it. It's not something that has to be run through Pointer. It's obviously something you can run yourself. And so we thought, why not share as we always do, give everyone the insights — how to do it, how to run them, what we like about them, what works well, what doesn't work well. So if anyone needs to get involved, they can. Cam?
Cameron Morgan: Yeah, I mean, some of our probably best and most successful hires have come from hiring days, Ricky. Built and scaled some really good and high performing teams through this hiring method. Like you said, the goal of today is to highlight what we've been able to do, but also give everyone here the opportunity to be able to run these themselves through our experience. So let's jump into it. First off — what is a hiring day, Ricky, and how does this differ from just your traditional hiring or recruitment process?
Ricky Pearl: I think the big thing is that this is a very compressed process. It's bringing in all of your shortlisted candidates, all of your preferred candidates, into a single day event, which really obviously compresses the timeline. But it also changes the decision criteria for how you evaluate candidates because you're getting to see a lot of different interactions that you don't just see when you're doing skills-based interviews or experience-based interviews in a one-to-one setting.
Cameron Morgan: Well, let's maybe just even simplify it more than that. Hiring day — one day, you bring everyone into a room, full day interview process, hunger game style. For us, halfway through the day, you let half the people go home. You take your shortlist through, and by the end of the day you hand out job offers to everyone you want. And for us, we've done that anywhere from four hires on a single day to 10.
Ricky Pearl: Yeah. And so obviously what we're doing here is in terms of the hiring process, you are replacing weeks of work. There's a lot of work up front that goes into it — that's what we've been doing, vetting all of the shortlisted candidates, getting them prepared, preparing what the content and the structure is for the day. But ultimately then you get this very condensed and quick process for a decision. Which is really good. But the other thing is, it's not just about the speed either. It's also about the new context that you're getting, the better comparison that you're getting when you're putting reps side by side in the same environment and testing them under some pressure situations. You don't always get that in one-to-ones. You get a different type of pressure, but not always the same.
Cameron Morgan: I think that's on your next slide there — speed isn't always the outcome. You actually get much better insights.
Ricky Pearl: Yeah. And let's just stay on speed for a moment. In some ways it's very efficient, but in other ways — I've seen the backend of trying to put one of these days on and it is huge graft. What are some of the challenges with, let's say the last one we did, 24 people in a room, trying to get 24 great candidates into a room for a full day event?
Cameron Morgan: Yeah, that's when we're talking about the time intensive part of the process. The time intensity switches to finding all of the right people that can be all available on the one day and having them all there, knowing that you've got a good collective of people so that you are comparing apples and apples. You've got 24 in the room of people that you think you want, and now we are vetting and finding the ones that we really do agree we want in our company. So that takes a lot of work upfront.
Ricky Pearl: And I think it's worth mentioning — that's probably one of the downsides. You definitely lose some good candidates. There's no doubt about that. They can't all make the day. So that's something to be aware of. We were lucky that we had the ability to account for one or two that slipped through, and we had a second hiring round to round out the team after the process. But one of the negatives — yeah, some people are just away that day.
Cameron Morgan: Definitely can be one of the negatives. With every pro there's a con, there's a compromise in some way. I think we'll go on — it's definitely in the slides beyond this of how those cons can sometimes just be outweighed by some of the positives that we gain from those days. This is all about talking about how speed is the outcome, but alignment is the goal. There's a lot more to it than just getting a quicker process happening. We're reducing time to hire — particularly when using Pointer or a recruitment firm that is setting up the day for you. Time to hire is now just one condensed day for the hiring manager or heads of departments that need to dedicate a day to come and evaluate and hire possibly 10 candidates at one time. Whereas that traditionally could take anywhere between four to eight weeks to go through a two to three stage interview process with single interviews.
Ricky Pearl: Yeah. Fair enough.
Cameron Morgan: But the other thing is, we've seen much higher offer acceptance rates. I think that's because they're coming into a full day and there's this real buzz, this real energy of all the people in the room vying for the same position. They're getting real leadership insights. Leaders are in the room. They're getting invested into the product. They're often doing activities based around the product — mock cold calls, ICP mapping and things like that. And they're starting to really see themselves in this role. So we've seen that when offers go out, very high acceptance rates.
Ricky Pearl: Well, they've almost pre-accepted the role, right? This is part of the pre-work that needs to be done. We'll talk about the real challenges right at the end of the day, which is when you get to that offer stage. But you kind of have to know going in that all 24 people in the room will accept this job if offered. There are still things they're learning during the day, but we've had to resolve all of that early on. Part of pre-booking them in for the day is in that early round screening and interviewing, making sure all of their questions are answered first. So that on the day you say "we want to make you the offer," you're just getting an "amazing, thank you, that's what I came here for." Not "well, actually that's interesting, I do have some questions though — tell me about this, what about that." You almost can't have that on the day.
Cameron Morgan: Yeah, a hundred percent. The day ends up being all about selection. It's a bit of a competitive environment. There's probably some psychology to that high acceptance rate of offers. They've committed a lot of time, they've really bought in. Very different from going through a long-winded process where, when you have a three, four, five, six stage interview process, there's time for waiting for feedback, there's opportunity for lots of inner monologue to creep in that can alter decisions. Whereas this all happens on one exciting day. The offer is made on the day, they're feeling good about everything that's just gone on. They feel like a winner because they've received an offer, and very high acceptance. And then, Ricky, maybe we can talk about retention. We've seen, particularly for SDR hires, which traditionally have high likelihood of churn simply because they're early stage entry level roles — they're very hard to verify against hard and fast skills and experience. But often when we're using a hiring day, I think we've got a hundred percent no churn so far with every company we've done this with.
Ricky Pearl: Yeah. Trying to think across all of them. I can think of one person who left like month eight, month nine. And I think there were circumstances around that.
Cameron Morgan: Yes. Alright, well let's get into some of the practical things here. Things that you've mentioned — having to prescreen people, knowing they're going to take a job, higher retention, higher acceptance rates. There's a lot of pros. But we also have to make a decision on the day. So you need the right people in the room. And you need the right assessments to be testing them in the right way. So maybe let's talk about first just when it works. We can then dig into where it breaks down, what can go wrong. And right at the end, maybe we'll get onto what are some of the actual exercises.
Ricky Pearl: A hundred percent. One of the ways this works very well is when you're doing multiple hires at once, obviously, because multiple hires means more and more interviews. We're reducing that by condensing into one day. That one's obvious. Junior to mid-level roles, definitely weighing more to the junior side, because what we're utilising on these days is the ability to test candidates not on their experience or specific skills. We're more looking for attributes and characteristics, what personality traits come out on the day and how they're going to translate to success in the job, versus what was their quota attainment in their last 10 years of sales. Very different conversations. And they're very useful when you've got a team that needs collaboration. You've got a bunch of reps all doing the same thing and you want to see how they're going to work together. If you've just got them siloed into one-on-one interviews, you don't get to see that.
Cameron Morgan: What about where it breaks down, Ricky? Sometimes hiring days aren't going to be the best option. Talk to us about when that might break down.
Ricky Pearl: For me, I guess it's if you haven't prepared for these correctly. If you only bring 10 people into the room and they're not the best 10, then that's really problematic. Without a doubt, that's going to be a big problem. You're starting off on the wrong foot. You've got to know exactly what you're looking for so that you can compare apples with apples, because that's part of what we're doing here. Often in an interview process you're thinking, "if it's this person, maybe we'll shape the role around them this way. If it's this person, we'll shape the role around them that way." Here you have to have done your legwork in what the role looks like, how they're going to work, and what you need.
If it's going to be a very strategic role — the attributes that you need to test and validate can't be tested or measured on the day. Let's say you've got a strategic leader and you're looking for them to put together a 30, 60, 90 day plan. You can't do that in a hunger game style event. So this is really not going to be great for your senior highly strategic roles, super complex roles, roles that aren't neatly defined. Or if you don't have the ability to really prep a hiring day well, because 95% of the work is still done before this hiring day. And if you haven't come to it well prepared, it's just a shit show.
Cameron Morgan: I agree. It's all in the preparation. The illusion here is that what we're talking about is reducing time to hire, or speed to hire. In some ways it's a bit of an illusion because there's probably more heavy lifting upfront, whereas usually you're delaying that work in a traditional process.
Ricky Pearl: Well, it's also just whose time are you saving? In our scenarios, we've screened a hundred, gone all the way through, and we've landed on "we want these 24 people here on the day." We've done all of that work. The actual hiring manager, the head of growth or head of sales, the head of marketing — has done nothing. If they were to have been involved in interviewing 24 people, it would be 24 thirty-minute interviews, so that's 12 hours. Usually there's prep for that interview and post-interview notes, debriefing, feedback on everyone. So it probably works out to about 30 minutes per interview worth of additional admin. That's 24 hours, three full days from this hiring manager to do one round. Then if they're doing second or third rounds, it gets complicated. And the coordination in between — just trying to find times for those meetings — probably takes about four hours of their time if you add it up. So a huge amount of the hiring manager's time. Whereas when we did it, the hiring manager could just be there for the day. Half of that day they were there during certain exercises, they weren't even involved. They were just off on their laptop doing some work. So practically speaking, total eight hours of their time at most. With them still being able to get to some of their other work in between. Massive time saver for the hiring manager. Not massive time saver holistically. The benefit though is in the quality. This is what I have to stress — every single time we've done this, we've ended up picking different people to who we originally suspected. Every time. There is something about bringing people into a room and seeing how they work together, how they handle pressure, how they collaborate, how they engage socially, that just changes things.
We saw one guy — the most polished, our top pick at one round — and he did two to three things on the day that were just slightly inappropriate in how he spoke to the women at the hiring day. When there was a task of writing on the whiteboard, he delegated it to the female in the room. And we're like, "ooh." You never find that out other than in an environment like this. And we had a decision to make with the hiring manager saying, "look, this is going to be a top performer but also problematic culturally. What do you want here? Are you willing to bring in some headaches for the sake of revenue at this stage?" And they're like, "absolutely not. Not for this role. We can't have that. We're building a team." And particularly for BDR teams — they're hard to bring in the right woman into your sales team, promote them in the business. Every sales team is constantly fighting against becoming this bro culture. So they're like, "we are not starting with those problems. This is an absolute no." Wouldn't have figured it out otherwise.
Cameron Morgan: There's far less guesswork when it comes to building that cohesion within the team and team culture. You're getting an understanding of personality when you're doing one-to-ones, but you're not seeing how those people interact with others. That's a perfect example. The last company we did this for — I speak to the manager once a week. Not only is the team performing super well, they're outperforming. He said, "everyone loves this team. They're just a team of weapons. They're all on the same vision, working collaboratively, love working together. The office is buzzing."
Ricky Pearl: Well, they came through a shared experience as well, so the team building started before they were even a team.
Cameron Morgan: Yeah, absolutely. And I just think that cohesion is super important, particularly at a startup or a scale-up. You won't get that as much — it's more of a guess in a traditional hiring sense around how this team is going to gel together. You're less guessing when you've already seen these 10 people in the same room trying to solve the same problems, essentially competing against each other but building this camaraderie whilst they do that. That's incredibly unique.
Ricky Pearl: Now, one of the things here that we haven't mentioned — and I don't even know if it's on one of the slides — but one of the biggest advantages to this hiring day was every person that was there, we knew would take the role, and we had already established start dates, potential start dates, and the alignment. So we had, or you can have, every person on that team starting at the same time, on the same day. That's part of this decision you're making. We were torn between number nine and number 10. Who should we take? It was a close call, there were disagreements, but we knew that one actually had a three-week notice period whereas the other one didn't. And we wanted the whole team starting the next week. Fast pace startup, we needed to get going. From briefing this to 10 people in seats, I think it was a total of about two weeks. But we knew one person couldn't make it, and we had to decide: is this person good enough that we'll redo the whole onboarding process? And we determined it wasn't. So having everyone onboard at the same time — talk about saving time from the hiring manager. That was the biggest one. They could come to one one-hour session about the company as opposed to doing that 10 times for every new hire. Or just decreasing the quality of the onboarding for the ninth hire because they're so over it by that stage. That's probably the biggest time saving in all of this.
Cameron Morgan: Yeah. I mean, that's probably the biggest headache when you're doing multiple hires — trying to align start dates to ease of onboarding. Really good point, Ricky. I skipped a couple of slides there on the ugly and what can go wrong, but I think we sort of covered that a lot. It goes wrong when it's not planned and prepped properly or when you're not aligned on the actual job brief and how you're analysing candidates. Let's talk about some of the logistics on the day.
Ricky Pearl: I think this is the hardest part to manage by far. You've got a lot to achieve and if there's 25 people in the room, even to do a 10 minute one-on-one with each person through that day, just once, just one 10-minute one-on-one which is insufficient for a lot of things — that's 250 minutes. With people swapping in between, it lands up being about 260 to 275. That's like four hours just to get through 10 minutes worth of one-on-ones. And then the person doing those one-on-ones hasn't seen what's been going on during those four hours with the rest of the cohort.
Cameron Morgan: A hundred percent. So let's talk about structure. I've got a one-pager that we'll be able to put out after this event that'll go through how you can structure this. But to your point, Ricky, the biggest thing — particularly around the beginning of the day — is to start with group-based exercises so that you can start to call that low-hanging fruit. We always have a period at lunch where we break, and that's where we make decisions over who we're not going to continue with for the rest of the day. Because we're not here to waste everybody's time. They have committed a lot of time. If we can see very early on that this person could be a great fit for another role but they're just not going to be the right person for us, we let them go at lunch. That's off the back of how they've interacted within a bunch of role-specific group-based exercises. That allows more time because when you're doing your 10 to 15 minute one-to-ones in the second half of the day, you've usually got a cohort that's half the size of what you had when you started.
Ricky Pearl: We know what we're looking for, which makes it easy. If we've done these few group exercises and there are people who haven't engaged, haven't made themselves stand out, haven't tried to take the lead or been meaningful contributors — even if they're following — whatever it might be that we're assessing, it often surprises us. There are some people that have just sat in every group exercise they've done, quietly in the background for four hours, and haven't tried to do anything meaningful. Now for some roles that might not be a problem. How you assess them has to be well structured, and every exercise that we do has a whole lot of strategy and undertones. What we're assessing them on is always quite different to the objective of the exercise. They're running through the exercise, but we're looking at who's taking the lead, who's following, who's being too pushy — we're looking at certain attributes.
Where they think we're looking at the outcome of that exercise — which might be "put together this kind of thing" — so they think we're testing their academic knowledge or their skills as a salesperson, but we're just looking at attributes. And then there are ones where we're asking for attributes, but really we're trying to look for something else. I wouldn't call it smoke and mirrors, but I think to get part of that true assessment, we always have to be quite clever in how this is structured.
And we have had scenarios where you just sometimes still can't split people between who's great or who's not. Normally, if you're hiring 10, there's four that you're a hundred percent on straight away, and there's four who literally after the first hour, you're a hundred percent no straight away. It's when you start getting to that last 20% that the real challenges come in.
And this is where we also have to recognise — we've built out this massive skills framework: attributes, skills, knowledge, everything reps need to succeed. And we know how much of this we're going to validate. We know which skills need to be hired with, that's part of what we're assessing. We're looking at which attributes we're going to try to validate on the day. But we're also very clear on which attributes we're not going to be able to validate. Which means we know unequivocally that this is something we're going to have to look at post-hire. That's just how it is. This is a post-hire thing. We'll know after they've started.
Cameron Morgan: That's a good shout — coming down to what are you looking for, what are you looking to learn and know from the hiring day versus what's the capabilities post-hire that we're comfortable with. We have the skills assessment and the academy for that. And yeah, that definitely helps. I think one of the other challenges, Ricky, is getting down to the final 10 or however many you're selecting on the day. There's that challenge of needing to have one-on-one time with those candidates to do some more traditional style interviewing on the day. And there's that challenge of creating time and space for that to happen while still keeping the rest of the group engaged. That's always a bit of a challenge for these days because they're full of energy, full of action, and things can slow down at that stage. People are going in and out of the room, going into interviews, people are looking around wondering what's happening. There's a bit of disruption. So that's worth noting — the second half of the day, you need to have other practitioners, other people in the room that can help lead that with you and control the environment and energy.
Because those one-to-ones — we did this on the last one, Ricky — when you're getting down to the ones you're thinking you're going to hire, having a one-to-one chat with them saying, "who else in this room do you think should be on the team? And why? Or who do you think shouldn't make it?"
Ricky Pearl: That happened recently. And we were shocked. We obviously word the question slightly differently to how you've brought it up here, but the point is — there's a team forming here. This team has a sense of who they want to work with now, who they gel with, who they've had a connection with. You get to see this. Probably the biggest part of this interview stage is just at lunch. We take them all for lunch. How do they order? Who coordinates the order? Who's polite and well-mannered? Who says thank you? Who sits together, who's left alone, who notices that one person is sitting by themselves and goes and invites them in?
Lunch for me is always where I'm switched on. That's the piece where I'm looking for the clues, looking for the signs. But they all came back — it was like four of seven came back to us when we said, "is there one person that you think doesn't fit in with the culture of the team that you think we're trying to build?" And four people all mentioned one person that was on our list to hire. We're like, what have they all seen that we've missed? And we had to dig into that. Super interesting.
Cameron Morgan: Because we've had this observer experience, whereas the reps — they're contributing, they're a part of it. So they're also getting this experience that's slightly different from ours.
Ricky Pearl: And they're having conversations that we are not a part of, because they're talking amongst themselves.
Cameron Morgan: Exactly right. So again, in a traditional hiring sense, reps might be competing for the role against others and they might be working together in the same team in two weeks' time, who knows? But they don't know who those people are. They haven't had interactions with those people. Again, just another benefit that all of the people you choose on the day have all spent a day working together — competitively, collaboratively, all of that. That's probably part of the biggest reason why you get such good team cohesion and culture at the beginning, versus maybe that taking three, four, five weeks to develop.
Ricky Pearl: So to summarise: saves you a lot of time. Saves the hiring manager a lot of time. It's probably even more work upfront to coordinate than a regular hiring process — probably more work in total, but significantly less work for the hiring manager. Better decisions. Overall it's faster because it's not this drawn-out one-month process, it's a one-day thing. From advertising through to putting on this event, super quick. And often you can set the start date before you start. Significantly better onboarding, less management load in onboarding them. Better team cohesion and culture and camaraderie. And if you are using a recruiter, it can be a more cost-effective way — depending on how many you're hiring, because you're bulking them, you could potentially negotiate better deals. And if you're doing it yourself, it's still just more economical overall. What are some other benefits? What have I missed here?
Cameron Morgan: I think some downstream effects are improved ramp times. All teams starting on the same day, same onboarding. They've all worked together, they've already collaborated, they've met each other. They do tend to ramp faster. It would be great for us to run these stats, but anecdotally, I think we can say you get an increased likelihood of high performance.
Ricky Pearl: Yeah. And retention.
Cameron Morgan: Definitely. We've definitely seen stronger retention and a high likelihood of high performance.
Ricky Pearl: Well, there's this competition that started in the right way because they're coming through as comrades. On day one and during this ramp period, when you hit the phone for the first day and you're like, "betsy, who books the first meeting?" Just having everyone there at the same time — the competition is organic and strong. Whereas if each person started three, four days after another, by the time number 10 joins, they're three weeks behind number one. Obviously number one seems better, but number 10 might actually be better. And now number one is getting defensive and trying to cause issues for number 10 because they were perceived as the golden child. Whereas they all start on day one, these kinds of egos don't build the same way, which is materially different.
Cameron Morgan: There's probably one other benefit we haven't mentioned as we finish up. They are just a lot of fun. It's a fun way to hire people from a company perspective or recruiter perspective, but from a candidate perspective, we've always had great feedback. I've never heard a candidate say, "oh you know what, I loved so-and-so's five-stage interview process, it was so great." But I've had lots of reps come back to us and say — even the ones that don't get placed and don't get the offer — they say, "you know what, I loved that experience. I loved that day."
Ricky Pearl: Yeah, because ultimately the reps don't mind the effort. What they mind is a month-long or six-week-long or seven-stage process where they wait two weeks in between every time. On the day, by the end of today, you either have a job or you don't. We'll always offer to make it worth their while — additional training, additional resources. Pretty much all of them will get a job, or we'll help them get a job. So we add to that because there is a big cost of them taking a day off work to be there. But you're right, they actually surprisingly all come back enjoying it and saying, "that was a really valuable day. I'm appreciative of the experience."
Cameron Morgan: Yeah. A hundred percent.
Ricky Pearl: Amazing, Cam. Awesome to run through that. Hopefully anyone who's watching this or watching the recording, take something out of it. If you ever want ideas on what the actual exercises are — because we've done bad ones and they've gotten better over time — we've learned now exactly which kinds of exercises to run, how to structure the day. Because it's only one day, you've only got one shot. If you stuff up how you run it and it's a shit show, you've now burnt all of the candidates, all of your decision-making capabilities. There's risk to running it all in a day. So if you want those insights, give us a buzz. Always happy to talk through them, and of course happy to run these for you. That's our bread and butter. So, figuratively, Cam, thanks for being on. We'll chat about this soon. And if you do run them — if anyone listening to this does run them and you don't want to talk to us about it — phone us afterwards and just let us know how it went. Maybe we can compare notes.
Cameron Morgan: Awesome. Thanks Ricky.
Ricky Pearl: Thanks everyone.
</details>