John Kim - The Hidden Costs of Hiring and How AI Amplifies the Problem

[00:00:08] Welcome to the HR Data Labs Podcast, now part of the WorkDefined Podcast Network. Join us as we explore the vital role of compensation, strategy, data, and people analytics in navigating today's complex business world. With the resources of WorkDefined, we're now bringing you deeper insights and actionable ideas from top experts. Now, here is your host, David Turetsky. David Turetsky Hi, I'm your host, David Turetsky, and welcome to the HR Data Labs Podcast.

[00:00:36] As always, we try and bring you the brightest minds inside and outside the world of human resources. Well, today with us, we have a very brilliant mind, John Kim from Powerform. How are you, man? John Kim Great. Thanks for having me. David Turetsky Our pleasure. Our pleasure. Or my pleasure. It's only me. So, you know, it's us now. John, why don't you give our listeners a little bit about your background? Who are you? Who is John Kim and who's Powerform?

[00:01:03] John Kim Yeah. Hey, guys. I'm John, one of the founders and CEO of Powerform. Powerform is a agentic hiring platform that, you know, makes hiring exceptional talent as easy as pressing a button. We do this where expert human recruiters and AI agents work together to deliver the best hires as fast as possible. So, yeah. David Turetsky Cool. Well, we're going to talk a lot about things like that. But before we do, John, what's one fun thing that no one knows about John Kim?

[00:01:33] John Kim What's one fun thing that no one knows about me? That's a good question. David Turetsky Yeah, by the way, this is one of the hardest questions we're going to get to today. So, or actually could be the hardest.

[00:01:43] John Kim Yeah. Fun fact. I mean, I don't know if this is like fun or not, but definitely people are surprised. Like I moved every two years growing up different country, new school, new city, because of my dad's job. He was like a sort of civil engineer that, you know, once like there's a project, we would move. And sometimes even the most rural areas, I would say. So like, yeah, but it was a really cool experience.

[00:02:15] John Kim And you were over it though. John Kim Yeah, because, you know, it takes time to make friends, settle into a new school, all of that. And then two years later, and you almost know you're going to say bye to them anyway. So it's a pretty difficult thing for a child to process. But I actually think from like maybe 10, 11 onwards, it actually ended up becoming a really great thing because I'm like, I'm looking forward to the next place and stuff. John Kim Right. Fun fact. Yeah. John Kim It becomes a superpower after a while because it's happened to you so much becomes muscle memory.

[00:02:46] John Kim Exactly. Yeah. John Kim Wow. Cool. All right. We know your superpower now. But we're going to get introduced to another superpower as we talk about the world of applicant tracking and recruiting systems. And we're going to talk about the topic of the hidden cost of a broker and hiring process. Now, we're going to get into it in just a minute.

[00:03:22] John Kim The Barf. Breaking news, acquisitions, research, funding. It's the week that was. It's a wonderful way to catch up on the week that was the week prior. Kind of a John Oliver-esque type of show. Ryan and I pitch each other stories. We laugh. It's fun. You can watch it on YouTube, but you can also subscribe to the podcast. Give it a listen. Give it a look. Thanks. John Kim So, John.

[00:03:52] John Kim So, John, let's get back into it. And I guess my first question is, why does AI often amplify a bad recruiting system instead of fixing it? You'd think it would fix it.

[00:04:03] John Kim Yeah. Great question. I think, unfortunately, in the current state of things, it is amplifying what's already broken. And we'd love to hear your take as well, David. But, you know, I think the way I think about it is the cost of outreach and the cost of applying to a job is basically zero. John Kim You know, AI can draft an application, a cover letter.

[00:04:33] John Kim Even the job description on the employer side. John Kim Exactly. And you could do a personalized outreach. You can use all those email automations. So what that means is a great engineer who used to get maybe 10 outreach messages a month is now getting 100 or even more, 500. And a great company that used to get 200 applications for a job opening is now getting 2,000.

[00:04:56] John Kim So, John Kim So, there is more noise than ever before. And the exact problem you want to solve in recruiting is actually the noise. And I think it's amplifying it. And so now we're even seeing companies building AI screening to prevent the AI slop. It's almost like covering a problem with a problem with a problem. And so that's kind of how I see it making it worse, actually. Yeah.

[00:05:20] John Kim Yeah. Well, and we've seen this happen. I mean, for those of us who've been watching this train wreck happen from a mile away, just seeing it come together. You know, there was early on in the AI world, we heard, hey, here's how you optimize your resume using AI. And we still hear that today. Oh, you know, use hidden fonts where you're using, you know, keywords from the job description and just throw them in there.

[00:05:48] John Kim And then we heard that people were getting dispositioned in five seconds. I've been on that at the end of that where within five seconds of me submitting my resume, it gets tossed.

[00:06:02] John Kim No, no, no follow up, no nothing. Just say, hey, thank you. Your resume is very impressive. But and by the way, with the hashtag or the brackets that say your name here, literally, where the recruiter name should be. So, John, I've seen this firsthand. And to me, it comes back to, well, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this, but the laziness of both sides of the process.

[00:06:37] John Kim So just so I understand the question correctly, like laziness. John Kim The recruiter's lazy. They're going to have the AI do all the posting stuff, including developing the job description, which may have nothing to do with reality. John Kim And then the person who's applying, the applicant, uses the job description to create their resume better or addressing the resume to the job description. John Kim Yeah.

[00:07:07] John Kim Setting up for that epic collapse you were talking about before. John Kim Yeah, no, I totally think there's definitely some laziness going on for sure. I think maybe it stems from maybe two things. One is that it's just such a difficult problem.

[00:07:24] John Kim I wouldn't say recruiting is necessarily like a dopamine-inducing activity, although I think it should be. It's sort of like sales where you mostly kind of there's no's, 90% rejection, right? All that stuff. And I just think it's a very difficult problem to hire the right person for the right role. That's one.

[00:07:44] John Kim Two I think people optimizing for the wrong metrics. Even internally, we have some metrics, but we try to have like a lot of guardrails to make sure we're incentivizing the right behavior. But if your goal is do 10 interviews a week, let's say that's what your head of talent or VP people give you, you're just going to kind of fill it up with the easiest possible thing, right?

[00:08:10] So I think I would encourage talent teams to be more rigorous about what that looks like. So it could be, you know, a minimum interview rate or, you know, things like that to like guardrail against that. But I do think there is definitely laziness. And I think I blame the system less the people. Yeah.

[00:08:25] Well, and quality of hire gets impacted by not the number of interviews you do, but the finding that I hate using this because it comes from indeed the needle in the haystack finding from that person who's really the right, the right person.

[00:08:41] But I guess the question I'd ask you is, you know, with AI being so huge on people's minds as well as in these processes, how do we find the right person with all the noise? Mm-hmm. Yeah. And I think you also asked, can AI actually help fix this? Yeah. Yeah.

[00:09:02] Yeah, no, I think it's a very nuanced answer, but AI, I think alone cannot solve it is, I think, my answer. I think AI, but also without AI, I think it's really, really difficult to solve. So it's a little bit of a, you know, both sides of the coin.

[00:09:21] I think that what's most important is some sort of information asymmetry problem. I think that companies, you know, don't necessarily kind of share, like, JD does not, I think, incorporate everything that they're actually looking for, nor is it the right medium because, you know, anyone can just apply.

[00:09:46] And I think that we also don't know enough about candidates. Like, you can make proxy assessments looking at a LinkedIn profile or a resume, but you need to talk to them. There's a million other things that you need to assess subconsciously or consciously to, like, actually make the decision. So I think that we need a lot more knowledge on both sides to solve this problem.

[00:10:10] So just to interrupt, though, for a second, you mentioned the word assessment a couple of times. And the assessment part of this used to be, hey, the manager had a checklist of things that he wanted to hear the person say, right? Then assessments became much more rigorous where they said, okay, let's give them a problem to solve.

[00:10:28] They'll go in a room, they'll solve it, and they'll come back and present it to us. In some cases, assessments have been, here's this take-home quiz. Do it now on your computer or your iPhone, and then, you know, we'll tell you how you did.

[00:10:41] Are we getting to the point, John, where assessments really need to be a critical piece of the hiring process? So we really do know that you know what the heck you're talking about when you say you're a prompt developer, and you can't write the, you know, you can't even ask Siri for what the weather is going to be tomorrow.

[00:11:00] Yeah, I think some form of assessment is definitely always necessary, right? I think it's rapidly evolving, for sure. Like, I think there are a lot of, like, I've seen many things, like, all the way from psychometric tests at the, like, consulting firms, all the way to, like, I don't know, yeah, like elite code, right, problem for engineers. Exactly. Exactly.

[00:11:26] I think that those assessment systems need to evolve with the broader workforce changing due to the new skills that are in demand and all of that. Sure. I personally think still the best assessment, and there needs to be a way to work out the economics and efficiency of this process, but I'm a big fan of, like, super days because, and, you know, some people call it work trials, some people call it, like, onsite or whatever, but I think

[00:11:53] the core thing is, what is it like to just work with this person? It could be pair programming, it could be all these different things, but I think work is inherently this sort of two-way street of collaboration and back and forth, and that's how you really know.

[00:12:11] It's chemistry. So I think I'm a big fan of some form of, you know, onsite super day work trial, and I think a lot of people sort of think it's only for the company. Of course it is. Of course it's an assessment that you make on a potential candidate, but I also think it's equally important for the candidate to assess the company.

[00:12:30] Like, do I see myself fit in here and dedicate XYZ hours over the next years to do this? So I really think it's a two-way street, and if you find the right person, the right fit mutually, it actually ends up, you end up selling each other. Like, it's like, wait a second, I really love it here. And it's like, wait a second, I really love working. So I think assessments are needed, it just needs to, yeah.

[00:12:55] Yeah, let me give you two different examples. It could be speed dating, where you, you know, like where it is today, where you interview someone, they go through five rounds of interviews, they go table to table to table to table, and it feels obnoxious. But you may get the right person. And then the other one is panic room, where you get someone to come in, and they try working in your environment, and they go, this place is mental, I'm not coming here.

[00:13:24] But either way, it actually does tell you, or it does give you the window into what you're going to be dealing with, whether it is speed dating or panic room. You know, either way, you're trying to figure it out. Gosh, I don't, do I want to work like this? No, give me the days where we were at least hybrid, if not remote, and I don't have to deal with these folks. I'm kidding, by the way. But you know what I mean, right?

[00:13:50] It's, you're subjecting someone to whether it's the speed dating. And by the way, I've been to plenty of interviews, or it's been speed dating. And you only get a half an hour with someone and you realize that you spend an hour with people you never work with and a half an hour with people you're going to be working with every day. Yeah. And then vice versa, if you had panic room, and you go, I don't want to work with this person. First of all, they don't know what the hell they're doing. And they're stressing me the hell out. So, I don't know, man. Either way, it sounds pretty bad. And I've been kind of in both.

[00:14:20] Yeah, no, I mean, I am, I am of the belief that, you know, I think more creative and novel ways to, you know, mutually assess in the process is super important. I haven't been in those situations, or speed dating. You're very lucky, John.

[00:14:41] But, I mean, I think to your point on the whole 30 minutes with the person you won't work with in an hour without, with who or not, I think, I definitely don't think, I think, again, like I might be stating the obvious, but I do think talent teams are run, traditionally at least, with slightly less discipline than maybe other functions. I don't know why, maybe it's because it's viewed as a cost center, like compared to like a revenue function, let's say.

[00:15:06] A lot of people actually say like, hey, if like a sales function, if it's like run with like rev ops, like similar rigor, then it actually might improve. And I actually agree with that a lot. I think that, you know, interview processes should not be performative, right? Like, or reason by analogy. It's like, hey, like this other company does speed dating. I like them. They're cool. So let's do speed dating as well, I think is like not the right way to do it. And what are you actually assessing for? Right?

[00:15:33] Like, you know, I think plenty of times I made the same mistake where I go into the interview and just interview for the sake of interviewing. But actually, what did I learn and what did we get out of that? Right? So I think big fan of, I think, creative ways to assess people. And I, you know, I think that's very important. Yeah. But where does AI help in this?

[00:15:53] Because you could imagine, because I've interviewed people or I've interviewed organizations that are starting at the precipice of actually having an AI do the interview like we are right now. Just I'm an AI and I'm interviewing you. And it does all of the questions and has all the psychometrics all built in. And it's trying to figure out, you know, is this person gaming me or whatever? And the person really can't tell that they're dealing with an AI on the other side. I mean, they can see it glitching.

[00:16:23] I'm sure. But we glitch too. So how does AI actually help that? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I don't know if AI doing the interview is the right form factor or the right application of it. I do think actually some roles, maybe especially like high turnover, maybe contractor roles.

[00:16:48] Like if the assessment criteria is justifiable and the candidate has a better experience because of it and so does the employer, then I think it's great. Right. Like I think the application of it is like I see some staffing companies do like I mean, maybe the candidate doesn't even want to talk to seven different people to see if you're culture fit for this contract role for three months. Right. Like maybe it really is just can you do this shift? Can you, you know, do you have this skill set? Right. So I think for those cases, it's good.

[00:17:17] But what I mean by where I can help, I think going back to your original question, it's I think it's we don't have enough knowledge and sort of information on both sides to make a matchmaking decision that quickly and efficiently. And I think that's why recruiting is an inefficient problem. And I think a lot of people are using AI in the wrong way.

[00:17:37] I think what's really important in this day and age is being ruthlessly honest about what is AI good at and what are humans good at and acknowledging it and kind of running with that. And at Powerform, we believe that humans are great at like building strong relationships, building trust, you know, understanding each other, getting information from each other, all that stuff, which is a byproduct of trust, really.

[00:18:05] But not so great at actually dealing with a long term memory or a context window or high volume of data processing. Like, obviously, AI is going to be better at that than us. So where I think AI can help is actually the matchmaking layer. Once that data is in, once that sort of distribution and access and those relationships are there, I think, you know, you can leverage AI to make matchmaking so much more efficient. So we use that exact application at Powerform.

[00:18:35] But John, doesn't the algorithm need to have a lot of data about the person in order to be able to make that determination? And where are you getting your data from? Is it from the resume? Is it from LinkedIn? Is it from the web? Because some of that you can use and some of that you really can't use. For sure. That's a really important point and something we take very seriously at Pariform as well. Um, you're right.

[00:19:00] It does need the right data to make the right decisions, if you will. And I think that's like very, very important. Um, traditionally speaking, I think. Candidates and companies are not really incentivized to share a lot of the data. If you think about it, for example, would a candidate put their salary expectation on LinkedIn? Probably not.

[00:19:31] No, but we really shouldn't be asking about salary expectation anymore because of pay transparency. It's not like asking about what you've made in the past, but it kind of aligns with that. Oh, for sure. I think, I think that, um, can't, we shouldn't be asking candidates. Um, I'm basically more so calling out the fact that we, uh, they, they shouldn't, they won't put it on LinkedIn. They shouldn't and they won't.

[00:19:56] Nor will they put maybe their, they will put their biggest strengths, but they may not put their biggest weaknesses. No, of course not. And, and same on the company side. Like when they pass on a candidate, you know, let's say Google, you got, um, passed on an interview stage. They're not going to give you feedback. Like, Hey, I mean, maybe great recruiters do. And if they have the time and the resources, but you're just going to get a generic, like, Hey, like, you know, either there were stronger.

[00:20:25] Especially if they're trying to keep that candidate warm for future potential hire. Yeah. So these, the, this information that in reality is what dictates whether you are right, the right person for the right role. And again, it's a two way street. It's not just a one way thing. Sure. It is not really happening right now. Um, on Powerform, we are a platform that connects specialized expert recruiters with companies.

[00:20:53] John, we don't sell on this podcast. Oh, oh yes. Yeah, no. So basically what I'm trying to get at is, um, people do tell recruiters, um, you know, what they're looking for. Their incentives are aligned. Hey, like I want this kind of job. The recruiter is on your side, right? They are almost like your sports agent, if you will. Right. Of like, hey, my client, my candidate wants to get to this job, you know, is expecting this much salary.

[00:21:21] I'm going to kind of work with them to make sure they get the best opportunity. And I think that's where the perfect marriage comes in, where candidates are like, I want to work with this recruiter, uh, to, from, for the best outcome. The recruiters are like, well, I would earn a commission if this person gets a job. So therefore incentives are aligned.

[00:21:39] And I think we kind of make those recruiters much more efficient at what they do using AI because we then go, hey, your candidate who told you that they want this kind of job is exactly a good fit for XYZ. Right. So I think more so using that information as a point to say, I think that, um, you know, it's important to have that kind of, um, matchmaking happen.

[00:22:01] But so, so I guess the question is in my mind, then do we need to change the, the way that recruiters are compensated in order to be able to make up for the change in how they're not just finding people, how they're closing them? Because one would imagine John, that it's not about just finding the right hire and getting time to hire lower time to fill lower.

[00:22:30] But that quality of hire, higher, the quality of hire metric as substantially higher as possible and aligning the incentives around quality of hire, which everybody's always been trying to chase for millennia. Um, well, maybe not millennia, but, but that's been a metric that we've been talking about. I think I've been talking about it for a thousand years, but I don't know, maybe not.

[00:22:54] Um, you see what I'm saying is that are we, are we compensating recruiters on just filling and putting a butt in the seat or are we asking them to hire the best because we require the best? I think it's a really great point, David. Um, I think there's like two ways I look at it.

[00:23:15] But yes, I think internal talent teams at companies there, there are like show me the incentives and show me how, you know, there's that saying, right? Like I think, um, yes, I do think we need to get more creative with how we compensate and incentivize recruiters. I think right now it's mostly just like a base salary with maybe like an annual performance bonus is like the most common. Um, but imagine. Oh, like collar workers. Yeah.

[00:23:39] For, for many not, it's still annual hourly salaries, sorry, hourly pay plus overtime. But yeah. And often they're contractors, right? They're not even full time. Many times. Yeah. Yeah. So, so I think that maybe that system maybe worked for a hundred years ago, but I think these days it should evolve.

[00:23:59] I think talent and people, HR is going to be, is I think already is, should be, and going to be one of the most important function at the company because it's going to be the scarcest thing to get is like great people in this day and age. And so I do think recruiters, yes, we should get more creative. Like maybe if they hit their hiring goals and maybe there should be something related to retention. Maybe there should be something related to performance.

[00:24:26] Like, you know, and, and I'll get to my sort of second point, um, as well, but I've heard this funny story where this headhunter basically placed the 13th employee at now a very big public company back then was a startup. And, um, he was like half joking, but complaining that, oh, I only got paid this much commission for it. And this person is made probably billions of impact at dollars of impact, um, in the company. So I think there's something like to be said there.

[00:24:55] I think the other thing is, I think, yes, we could change the compensation structure of recruiters, but, you know, this is my belief and people can agree or disagree, but I actually think a more, a better world is where more recruiters are actually independent and, um, not working for a single company, rather, um, almost like working for the candidate, if that makes sense.

[00:25:23] So like, imagine a world where I think that a external recruiter, a headhunter or a recruiting firm is actually working for the candidate. Of course they're working for their client, but they're not working for one. So I think, you know, in a world where more folks are incentivized through outcomes or, you know, things like that, I do think the matchmaking problem will actually become more efficient.

[00:25:51] Um, so I think that's one other way. Again, that's not to say that internal talent teams are not needed. I think people underestimate what they do. It's not just sourcing. They do a bunch of other things that are important. So I think, uh, a combination of a almost like lean, but high performing talent team incentivize the right way, um, with the right KPIs and metrics, uh, combined with, I think a lot of, um, sort of, um, you know, external recruiters, I think actually is, is a very good combination.

[00:26:21] Yeah, it is. But I gotta be honest with you. I've dealt with both internal as well as external headhunters in my lifetime. The external are trying to sell people and sometimes they don't even know them. So they don't really know their strengths and weaknesses. And the internal client is relying on the recruiter to, to know the culture of the organization, to know the culture of the team and to make the right fit. And the external person would have no clue about that.

[00:26:51] Mm-hmm. So I agree with you to an extent, and it would be a really interesting business model change to see, you know, maybe a facilitator stay, but a headhunter go from the recruiting team and see how that works. The problem is, is that you're still doing the same thing.

[00:27:11] You're still farming or hunting to try and find the right people, align them to, with internal business strategies, refer them as good candidates, and then, um, close it out and take them through the hiring process. So to me, that really does speak of an internal need. Mm-hmm. I mean, could we shake it up? Of course we could. Mm-hmm. And could we make it more of external and internal? Sure we could.

[00:27:40] You have to align, though. And at some point, you might just say, the business model just works better if they're internal, because I can't afford to pay them what they'd want externally like that. For sure. Yeah. I think if you made every hire externally, you'd probably go bankrupt, right, like as a company. So totally. Yeah, but it's also a very expensive proposition. And you don't want those people aligning with your competitors, because they know everything. You know where the bodies are buried. Recruiters know everything. Yeah. Yeah, no, certainly.

[00:28:10] I think it's definitely a broader conversation around, are we going to be increasingly a candidate-led market or a company-led market? Like there's a lot of different factors. But I agree that I think, you know, there's pros and cons to each approach. Particularly on the external folks not being, I guess, looped into the culture and all these different things that an internal team might. I agree with that.

[00:28:36] Actually, I think it's something that the external folks need to figure out how to do better, whether it's through really, really great onboarding or longer term relationships or all these different things I think they need to get better at. And I think there's also things that internal talent teams can do better. And I think the role of AI also is, I think, to kind of help them help recruiters do their job much more effectively and better.

[00:29:04] So, like, you know, I'm sure recruiters don't want to do, like, kind of grunt work or back office, like, work like that. So, I think, you know, can AI help do that? Or even coordination, right? I don't think I talked to a single recruiter who said I love, you know, getting scheduled from the candidate. Right. So, I think there's a lot of things that AI can do. I'm pretty sure also they would love to automate their outreach, right? You know, all those sorts of things.

[00:29:28] So, I really think a combination of kind of, you know, a very well-run internal talent team with the right automations, with the right incentives, combined with access to, you know, the best specialized recruiters externally. I think another argument for having a better balance is, I think we see this almost perpetual negative cycle in HR and recruiting, where it's very, with the economy, very volatile, right?

[00:29:59] Let's say company A needs to hire a lot in Q3 and Q4 this year. They go, okay, we need a lot of resources at hand. And so, they hire a bunch of recruiters, maybe people ops, and all these different things to support that. And then, like, next year, actually, whether it's a business change or some economic downturn, you don't need them anymore. So, you lay them off. And that happens every two to three years.

[00:30:26] And I've heard from so many recruiters that they're sick of it, honestly. And so, I think, how do we create a world where, you know, you're disciplined about, like, what kind of resourcing you need? You know, how do you have, like, an on-demand, almost HR recruiting function? And I think a combination of both can really help solve that. And that's where gig comes up, right?

[00:30:51] Gig workers, where you bring them in for a period of time, they do what's needed, they go away, and then they come back when necessary. And that's what the consulting model is. You know, that's what I live every day. You know, companies need me for a period of time, I go away, and a year later, they go, hey, we need your help on that thing again. And that's what gig work is. And gig work has become really important because companies don't like the ebbs and flows of, you know, W2 hiring.

[00:31:20] And by the way, John, to be honest, W2 hiring is a relic of the past. The only reason why we did this is literally because we wanted to tie people into what we do, keep them there so they can't escape and go tell our competitors. That's still the case, but you sign confidentiality agreements usually that outlive the employment cycle. So only jerks go and tell their next company what they did before.

[00:31:49] But anyways, my point is that I think we're living in a paradigm on employment where, especially in the new gig economy, we're in a different world now, man. Totally different world. I 100% agree. I think work will become more flexible. Like, you know, I actually see this happen in marketing a lot. I don't know if you also noticed, but there's a lot of like, you know, like performance marketing outsource when you need it or like, you know, SEO.

[00:32:19] Like, I think I see a lot in marketing and we're already adopting that model at Pariform where we have sort of like a lean team internally and then leveraging like more of a budget and external resources to combine. So I totally agree. Yeah. And that's where Fiverr comes in and some of these others like Upwork and whatnot where you can hire some really great people, pay them what you need to for a period of time. They don't become a W-2 expense for you. They become a, you know, a contractor expense. But it's so much less heavy weighted.

[00:32:50] You don't want them around forever. You want them around for the period of time that they're helping you and then get out of here. And I think you're right. I think we're going to, our systems are going to evolve and our processes need to evolve alongside of that. By the way, HR is really tough at making process changes. They usually say, well, this was built in 78 and it's still working fine. Well, that was a lifetime ago or a couple of lifetimes ago for some people.

[00:33:20] And the world changes. So your processes need to change to stay with the times. Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I think, you know, we talked a lot about talent acquisition. So, like, assessment all the way to interview process, recruiting, all that. But I think same applies to HR and people. I think, you know, retention strategy. Like, I've seen a lot of creative new ways of, like, compensation or retention that are happening.

[00:33:50] You know, yeah. Like, what people value as a kind of perk or benefit. You know, what are they looking for from their company? Is it really just, is it really the same 10 years ago? You know, maybe not, right? So I think a lot of things do change for sure. Well, it's definitely not the same thing as it was 10 years ago because there's no such thing as loyalty anymore. There's also no such thing as, what's the word?

[00:34:19] Company loyalty. Not just employee loyalty, but company loyalty. Companies, you know, they're letting people go on a moment's notice with, you know, without two weeks notice. Without severance packages, you know, unless it's, you know, required. But they're doing things that are, we shake our heads in the world of HR and go, who told you that was a good idea? Like these firing sprees that happened a while ago in the name of AI.

[00:34:47] And now they're hiring those people back because they realize AI can't do this stuff. You know, we need people. We need the human in the loop. So I think that's going to still evolve because we don't learn our lessons. Humans always repeat their mistakes and they will. And it's just, it's awful. Especially if you have a family. Yeah, yeah, yeah. They rely on you. Totally.

[00:35:14] I think, I think really at the end of the day, like companies, you know, make mistakes too. Whether it's, whether it's like at the time of when that change needs to happen or maybe sometimes it could have been earlier. And I think, you know, the best companies almost always, you know, always continue to like look at that and go, how do we prevent this from happening next? And learn and then iterate. Companies that don't, don't.

[00:35:42] And so I think, yeah, like, like any person, I think companies should also continuously upskill and improve. So, yeah. Well, let's hope. Let's hope they do. Because with AI and with the newness of the tool sets that are there, that we're learning every day of new tool sets and how to use them. I have a, I just bought a NVIDIA DGX Spark sitting on my desk. It's a supercomputer sitting on my desk. What? What?

[00:36:11] What for? What did you? Exactly. What for? Exactly. What would you use the server for? The supercomputer sitting on your desk? Well, I want to create my own RAG and train it on the best practices in the world of HR and compensation. And so my clients can feel comfortable that I'm building a secure, literally it's sitting on my desk, a secure box that doesn't go to the internet or it doesn't share their data with the internet. It's sitting on my desk.

[00:36:41] And nobody's getting through that door. And nobody's getting through that doorway. I've got two pugs that'll, you know, lick them to death. But, but, but, but I mean, that's the story here is that we're getting tools every day that are brand spanking new, John, that, you know, people are like, why would you do that? Well, the answer is, you know, because it's the new way. Anyways, John, I got to tell you, this has been a really thrilling conversation.

[00:37:08] We got to have you back on to talk a little bit more about this because it will evolve over time. Thank you very much for being here. Yeah, of course, David. Really enjoyed it. My pleasure. And thank you all for listening. Take care and stay safe. Thank you for listening to the HR Data Labs podcast. Don't forget to hit subscribe and share it with your network. You can also check out the recordings on Spotify or the HR channel now on Roku and Fire TV.

[00:37:37] Thank you. Take care and stay safe. I get it. The podcast just isn't enough. That's all right. Head over to your favorite social app, search up work defined, WRK defined and connect with us.