In this episode, Beah (SVP, Product) and Zbig (Director, Talent) discuss our approach to hiring, and how it’s designed to reflect our unique, cross-functional and mostly async ways of working.

Show notes: Check out our careers page and open positions here.

Disclaimers: (1) The audio, video (above), and transcript (below) are unedited and may contain minor inaccuracies or transcription errors. (2) This website is operated by Substack. This is their privacy policy.

Beah: Hello. Hi, everyone. Welcome to DuckTales, ⁓ where we go behind the scenes at DuckDuckGo and discuss the stories, technology, and people that help build privacy tools for everyone. In each episode, you’ll hear from employees about our vision, our product updates, our approach to AI, or how we operate as a company, which is the zone that today’s episode will fall in. ⁓

Zbig: Okay.

Beah: introduce myself briefly. I’m Beah Burger-Lenahan. I lead the product team here at DuckDuckGo. And we have with me Zbig. Hey Zbig, do want to introduce yourself?

Zbig: Yeah, of course. Hi, Beah. Hi, everybody. I’m Zbig. I’m on the Talent Acquisition team. I’ve been around for almost seven years now at DuckDuckGo, and I feel very privileged to have seen this amazing journey of us scaling the team from about 50 to over 350, where we are right now and I’m super excited to be here and talk about hiring.

Beah: Awesome, thanks, the big. Yeah, so today we’re gonna talk about how we hire, what that process looks like, why, and so forth. Hopefully it’ll be interesting to everyone. ⁓ So maybe just to get started, can you kind of lay out at like the highest levels of our approach to hiring, what that process looks like?

Zbig: course. Yeah. So I think at a, at a highest level, um, there is, you know, lot of intentionality and discipline to how we hire. So we would do that only when we have like a really clear and well articulated need. So when we’re scoping roles, right? Like we would want to deeply understand what the actual tangible problems are that we want that particular role to solve for us. And then we designed the hiring process to test for the skills, the competencies that are critical to being able to do that. So in practice, that means that we base that hiring process ⁓ largely on test projects ⁓ rather than interviews. Well, there are usually a couple of interviews in every process, but we definitely attach way more weight to test projects. We also tried to design that hiring process in way that ⁓ it’s truly like a two-way street and allows Canada to discover how we work. So, you know, they can make a well-informed decision at the end about whether or not this is good place for them. And I think one other thing worth highlighting ⁓ that comes out of this intentionality and discipline is the fact that, you know, never in the company history, we were forced to do any group layoffs. And when you look at the tech market these days, that’s very rare.

Beah: Yeah, because we only hire people that we know we really need.

Zbig: that will really advance the goals of the company, right?

Beah: Yeah, got it. Okay, thanks. So let’s talk about the projects since they are, as you said, kind of the core of our process. Are these projects, do we expect people to do them for free?

Zbig: Sure. Yeah. No, we offer payment, which is kind of like average bubbly, but it’s usually like anything from 50 to 100 US dollars per an estimated hour of work required to complete a project. These are, and this is just like recognize the time candidates put into those. These projects are always role specific and designed to simulate the actual work one would be doing on the job. You can complete them async on your own time. And I truly believe that allows candidates to demonstrate the best of their abilities without the typical pressure and stress of interviews. And also like when you think of the async format, that much more closely reflects how we work on a daily basis at DuckDuck. Because I think that probably like, I don’t know, 70, 80 % of collaboration here happens asynchronously. There are a few meetings throughout the week. And ⁓ we’ve picked this format for the hiring process very intentionally. There’s actual research behind that that proves that work samples, test projects that are role specific, they’re much less prone to bias and error than interviews. And what we found through that ⁓ is that they are great predictors of future success on the job. And when you look at our retention rate, that’s 95%. You know, our engagement scores are also very high, like I think 86 % way above market benchmarks for companies of our size and at our stage of growth. like there’s actual, you know, quantitative validation that this approach works very well for us.

Beah: Yeah, is it challenging to get people to commit to doing these projects? It can be a bit of time.

Zbig: It is one of the bigger challenges of our hiring process because these test projects can take anything from like three, four hours up to 15 and in some cases maybe 20. And we typically expect folks to complete two of those, two sometimes three. So that’s like a time investment of about 25, 30 hours in test projects. I think we do our best to really to adjust to Canada’s availability. There’s like from our side, there’s no pressure on like when exactly they should be starting on those. They can plan ahead, set that time aside. If they need an extension, they can just let us know. And we usually have no problem to grant that because we understand that different things can come up in life that could derail their plans. So So we really try to adjust our pacing to candidates, be very flexible with those timeframes to ⁓ make it feasible for them.

Beah: Got it. I’m shifting gears a little bit. So where do we hire in the world and why?

Zbig: Hmm. So we hire globally though, not everywhere. We have like a selection of countries where that we’ve decided scale to based on like ⁓ a pretty nuanced estimate on the available town pools, how those relate to our needs, ⁓ how easy it is also to like scale within them from the administrative financial logistics perspective, perspectives, but we are able to hire across tens of countries around the the globe. And I think that’s awesome because that gives us access to amazing talent ⁓ that often when you think of some of these countries, there aren’t that many opportunities to work on something of a comparable scale that Go offers. So we’re way more competitive there, right? And we’re truly... I’m actually in Krakow in Poland and we have a pretty pretty big contingent here, like I think one of the fourth, fifth biggest representations geographically across the company with over 20 people. yeah, there’s definitely a great advantage of this remote setup that enables that. ⁓ And I think also what makes it possible is the fact that as a company, we’re designed from ground up for full remote collaboration, right? When you think of the companies that were switching to remote during the pandemic, that often didn’t work out and many of them are now calling people to go back to the office because they didn’t really have the right processes and culture to enable effective collaboration. I think that’s definitely not the case here.

Beah: Where are you located today?

Zbig:

Beah: Yeah. Yeah. I will say, mean, the remote ⁓ employee base has challenges for sure, and it has a lot of upsides as well. I think for me, like one kind of just fun perk of it is that it’s cool to know people from all over the world. ⁓

Zbig: yeah, for sure.

Beah: you know, when I think about like traveling I think, ooh, like who can I go see?

Zbig: Yeah. And also when you think of like, we’re building a global product or a set of global products, right? And I think it’s invaluable to have people from different geographies representing different cultures and perspective, because that helps us inform like how we can be building those products for a broader audience that really ⁓ meets their needs and solves jobs for them.

Beah: Yeah, makes sense. So you mentioned ⁓ one of the challenges of our hiring process is getting people to commit the time to the projects. Are there any other significant challenges?

Zbig: Mm. Yeah. I think the probably the biggest one is related to how we work. Cause as you know, we’re pretty uniquely organized over here. There’s no middle management. There’s no like separate project management function. And in practice, that means that everybody really is expected to be able to scope, propose and execute projects. Sometimes that means, you know, managing a cross-functional project team and that skillset is not that easy to get on top of the functional expertise, Like functional competencies. So ⁓ we often end up hiring, you know, we do most of our hiring in engineering and at a senior individual contributor level, like senior engineer, and we often end up hiring folks, you know, performing these like more senior leadership related responsibilities elsewhere, sometimes even like holding more senior titles than what, we have on the job description. Disclaimer though, don’t use job titles internally. We don’t want them to get out of picking the best solution or going in the most optimal route. We try not to make decisions based on authority. And that’s worked well for us, I think, over the years.

Beah: . . I’m curious. I’ve never asked you this question or I don’t know the answer. Do candidates find it appealing that we don’t use titles internally or does it put some people off?

Zbig: Thank I think many of them, I think many of them do, and they do highlight, well, we get a lot of that feedback from candidates in the hiring process, but some of them do raise it as an objection. And I get it. you know, I think typically on the market, there’s a lot of weight attached to job titles, right? Because they demonstrate certain progression throughout one’s career. And some candidates decide not to give that up, which I totally get, right? Like if someone is already like, I don’t know, staff. engineer, principal engineer, and the max they can get here with us is a senior level position. ⁓ I understand why, you know, a certain percentage of people would not want to do that, right? But in practice, though, like for people who really care primarily about the ability to make impact in the org, that title here, it doesn’t... doesn’t matter really, right? Like it does not give you more authority or impact in any way.

Beah: Yeah. So I think like in our conversation so far, a lot of it has been about this like very particular point of view that DuckDuckGo has that ⁓ may be different from a lot of companies, a lot of hiring processes.

Zbig: Mm-hmm.

Beah: ⁓ But my sense is also that we have evolved, like while we have a very particular point of view, it is not a stringent one that has been the same for years and years and years, like it’s evolved quite a bit. Any significant changes in your time here that you think are worth calling out?

Zbig: yeah, yeah, of course. And I think at a higher level even like we continue to iterate and improve all of our processes, right? ⁓ And that applies to hiring as well. So like one of the big things we had in the past was the so-called internal contracting period when, you know, once you completed the hiring process, we didn’t bring you in full time, but we asked you to do some sort of a part-time internal contract. you know, do some you know, a single sometimes maybe two projects as part of the team, but not working with us full time. So usually people, I did that too. It wasn’t the best experience. So the first thing I did after joining was to look at the data of like, okay, how many people going through that actually join, right? Like how big of a filter is that in our hiring process? And what it turned out was that, well, we actually bring in everybody. Like there was, think one exception that that we weren’t even like sure about going into that internal contracting period. But the data told the story that, well, the hiring process itself is such a good predictor already. We don’t need that. And that was a, I think that was a great change because it enabled us to engage with people who otherwise would not be able to invest that time on top of their jobs or personal obligations, right? So that was definitely a big enabler in accelerating the pace of hiring.

Beah: I did that. ⁓ back. Got it. So we did that, that was like inspired by you not having a good experience, like the con, you being kind of put off by the.

Zbig: Not just me, There was a broader, like my experience was one of the data points, but there was a broader discussion with leadership where, you know, we looked at like, okay, how scalable is that? Like we’re hiring maybe 20, 30 people per year. We were when I was joining, but we were looking at increasing that substantially, right? So it wasn’t a great experience for candidates. wasn’t a great experience for people internally. Ask to oversee those internal. contracting period, so there were multiple arguments for making that change. But only when we examined the data, we knew that, OK, that’s up. It doesn’t make sense to be doing that anymore.

Beah: Mm. Yeah, that makes sense. You mentioned we were hiring maybe 20, 30 people a year at that point. Can you talk about what our hiring volume looks like now?

Zbig: Yeah, so it’s our record year this year. So I’m super pumped about that. We are on 80 hires this year, ⁓ which is absolutely amazing. Yeah, yeah, there may be a couple more. So we’ll see. ⁓ But yeah, it’s really great to see that growth. And we’re bringing in some amazing people. So yeah, that’s super cool.

Beah: And we got 2 months left to go. Yeah, do you think we, over the process of the last few years, our ability to make the right selection in terms of both people that will be successful here and that will be happy and thrive and want to stick around has improved?

Zbig: I think so, yeah, and quite considerably. ⁓ So we were looking to tighten the feedback loop for new hires to get an even better sense of how fast new hires are reaching full productivity. But when we look at the data, ⁓ the success rate is very high. And ⁓ we rarely have instances of new hires failing to meet expectations, which is another benefit of this highly disciplined, intentional approach. ⁓

Beah: Yeah, you mentioned 95 % retention. Yeah, that seems very good.

Zbig: retention. Yeah, that’s continued over the years, right? Like when we scaled from 50 to over 350, we’ve managed to maintain that. And I think we’re only getting better.

Beah: Yeah, I remember when I was in a much loosey-gooseier process to be hired at DuckDuckGo seven-ish years ago. was talking to Gabriel and I was kind of asking him about what it’s like to work at DuckDuckGo and he was like, mean, nobody’s really left in the last four years. It wasn’t exactly what he said, but was something like that. Basically nobody had left in years, maybe like one or two people. ⁓

Zbig: Right. Later. Yeah, yeah,

Beah: Okay, one more question for you and then ask if you have anything else you want to say before we close. what, I’m curious what proportion, where are coming from? ⁓ What portion of hires are referrals versus inbound?

Zbig: So the vast majority comes through inbound, and that’s a combination of our Curious website and ads we post on LinkedIn and other job boards. But Curious is still, I think, the main contributor there. It’s, I think, 64 % for inbound total. And that makes sense, right? We have such a big user base where pretty popular among engineers. A lot of our hires are actual users of our products, which is amazing because then they contribute with their feedback and thoughts to helping us improve our products. ⁓ Similar to other companies, ⁓ the second best source of hires is referrals. I think a quarter of our hires ⁓ come from referrals and ⁓ that’s always been a great source also in terms of the retention and performance of these folks. So we’re trying ⁓ to leverage that as much as possible.

Beah: Also, just interject that when we hire people who are not users of our product. They’re also really great at helping make the product better because my question is, why aren’t you a user? What’s stopping you? I mean, we expect everybody to use our products once they’re here, but it’s sort of nice to have people who maybe like weren’t dedicated, loyal users ahead of time because they maybe have a different basis of comparison and also reflect a large number of users that we would like to ⁓ list.

Zbig: For sure. Of course. Yeah. I think. Exactly. I think it’s great to have both of these perspectives, right? ⁓ Because the non-users, they usually bring a completely new set of eyes and views on our product offering. So yeah, I think we’re really contributing from having people from both of these poles.

Beah: Yeah, what anything else that you want to share before we wrap, Sabing?

Zbig: I think, yeah, I mean, like one other interesting thing is that it does take a lot of effort to hire, you know, and we have multiple people from our functional teams, engineering, other teams too, involved in the hiring process to help with test project reviews, to help with interviews. And perhaps for this, I looked up the data and, you know, only this year we’ve done over 2300 project reviews and 790 almost 800 interviews. So yeah, it’s a huge effort that goes into that. But we honestly think it’s worth it. Like getting hiring right and making sure that people who bring in will make a positive impact that will be happy here. I strongly believe this is one of the most powerful levers we can be pulling as a company. I think that effort is totally worth it. And of course, we continue to look at how we can optimize and improve the efficiency of the hiring process so it’s less of an effort. But that’s a continuous process,

Beah: . Okay. Yeah. Awesome. Well, thank you, Zabig. That’s all I got.

Zbig: Awesome. Well, super happy to be here and thank you for this. That’s been great.

Beah: Alright, see you later!

Zbig: See ya.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit insideduckduckgo.substack.com