Kit takes the brief from the manager first.

Which to choose

Choose Metaview if you want to improve your hiring process. Metaview is designed for that: it calls itself "the Agentic Recruiting Platform built for radically efficient hiring, end to end." Its notes are "AI notetaking made for interviews and hiring teams.", and it says "Screening is the voice agent that speaks with every candidate and scores each call against your rubric."

Choose Speak to Kit if you want to improve your hiring outcome: the impact of the person you hire. Speak to Kit is designed around what a top performer delivers in their first 12 months, who is still delivering a year later, and, on the Talent and Enterprise plans, a check-in on every hire at 30 days, 90 days and a year.

Process and outcome

A hiring process is the steps from advert to offer: the screen, the interview, the notes, the shortlist. A hiring outcome is what the person hired goes on to do. Speak to Kit is designed for the second: does the person succeed, do they stay 12 months, are they accepted by the team.

Both matter, and a better process can lead to a better hire. Speak to Kit starts at the other end, with what the hiring manager wants the person to have delivered a year from now, and works back to who to meet.

Where the standard comes from

A rubric written from a job spec starts with the job description. Kit starts with the outcome. With an ATS linked, the hiring manager gets an email or a Teams message with a top performer profile already written for the role. They refine it, and Kit works against it.

From that profile Kit writes one question with a good answer and a great one. Every applicant gets the same question, asked in a way that fits their experience. The manager can change any word before Kit speaks to anyone.

What the research says about structure

Sackett, Zhang, Berry and Lievens re-checked decades of studies in 2022. A structured interview, with the same questions scored the same way, is now the best single predictor of how someone will do in a job. It scores .42, against .19 for an unstructured chat.

Structure has degrees. Huffcutt and Arthur found the least structured interviews scored .20 and the most structured .57. And the first few minutes of small talk can decide more than they should: in Barrick, Swider and Stewart's 2010 study, early rapport shaped the interviewer's final rating at .42.

Kit asks every applicant about the same things, keeps asking until it has their fullest answer, and scores the conversation, not the CV.

What it gives a recruiter back

At Rhaelm, 66 of the 70 applicants who started a call with Kit finished it. The recruiter added up the conversation time Kit had held on one role.

After the hire

The outcome is counted after the hire. Kit learns each time a company hires. On the Talent and Enterprise plans, Kit checks in at 30 days, 90 days and a year to ask who is doing well, who stayed and who grew, and that goes into the next profile for the team. Early on, the company sees how often its hiring managers agree with Kit's recommendations and how many interviews each hire took.

Kit recommends. Your people decide. Every conversation is recorded, so the hiring team can read exactly what was asked and answered.

What Kit asks about: the way each person works

Kit asks where a person was at their best, and why. It asks what got in the way, what they did about it, and whether the hard part of this job is work they enjoy. Recruiters who had done the job for twenty years taught Kit what to ask, then listened to its calls and corrected it.

Applicants can speak to Kit by phone or in writing, whenever suits them, for as long as they need. Most conversations take 15 to 20 minutes. Kit reads back what it heard, so the applicant can correct anything before the team sees it.

What one person's impact is worth

The person hired is where the value sits. As a floor, Schmidt and Hunter found a better-than-average person is worth at least 40% of salary a year more than an average one. In a job paying £60,000, someone in about the top sixth is worth at least £24,000 a year more. It is a rule of thumb, not a measured figure for any one job.

Senior executives at 35 large US companies told McKinsey in 2001 that a high performer adds 40% more productivity in operations and 67% more revenue in sales. That is what executives believe, not a measurement, though it sits close to the measured gaps.

Running both

Some teams will want notes from the interviews they run themselves as well as a first conversation with every applicant. The two jobs sit at different points: Kit before the interview, a notetaker during it. Kit's notes, transcript and recommendation land on the candidate's record in the ATS, where the rest of the hiring team already works.

What it is worth

A better process is counted in hours saved. A better outcome is counted in who is still delivering a year later. A team's rubric measures what the team asks. Speak to Kit measures what a top performer delivers in 12 months, then, on the Talent and Enterprise plans, Kit checks in on every hire at 30 days, 90 days and a year, so a company can count first-year leavers. That's where the money is: in UK small firms 16 in 100 new hires leave within their first year, at about £51,000 each on an £80,000 salary. For example, an airline software company hiring about 500 people a year has about 80 first-year leavers, costing about £2.2 million a year. Halving that would be worth about £1.1 million a year (estimate).

How one failed hire costs about £51,000