Don't just interview candidates.
Audition them.

See candidates do the job before you hire them. Live, multi-perspective assessment designed for founders.

You're on the list. We'll reach out when early access opens.

No credit card required. Be first in line for early access.

Here's the problem with hiring.

Every hire is a $200K bet. But interviews are the worst way to make it.

You spend 15-25 hours a week on hiring. You're good at your job, not at judging who's good at theirs. Interviews reward charisma and interview skills, not job performance. Work sample testing is 29% more predictive than interviews — yet most of us hire on gut feel and a resume.

Picture this: You're a founder with 10 people. You hire someone who "interviewed well." By week four, they're a cultural misfit. By week eight, you've spent $17,000 in salary, benefits, and ramp time. They're gone. You're back to square one.

74% of companies made at least one bad hire last year. 30% of failed hires are due to personality conflicts or poor culture fit. That's the part you can see coming — if you know how to look.

Here's what bad hires actually cost.

Base salary (example $50K first-year hire) $50,000
Benefits and onboarding $10,000
Ramp and training time $20,000
Productivity loss while replacing $30,000
Team disruption (morale, time) $20,000–$70,000
Total per bad hire $130,000–$180,000+

For a 10-person startup, that's someone's annual salary. Gone. For senior hires? Up to $240K when you factor in team damage and your time spent hiring again.

There's a better way.

Multi-avatar simulation. You see them do the job.

Not a personality test. Not a vibe check. Not questions they've rehearsed.

A live, interactive simulation where candidates work through realistic scenarios with multiple AI avatars representing your team. A demanding client. A confused colleague. An executive with a tight deadline. All at once. In real time. With nowhere to hide.

You watch how they actually behave under pressure. How they think. How they communicate. How they handle conflict. Whether they fit your team.

The science is clear: Behavioral observation has 0.43 predictive validity for job performance. That's double the validity of personality tests (0.23) and better than most interviews.

The Three-Step Process

1

Create Your Scenario

Define the role and scenarios that matter. What does success look like? What problems will they face on day one? Takes 15 minutes. No technical knowledge required.

2

Candidates Audition

They interact with your multi-avatar scenario. Live, synchronous, recorded. No preparation tricks. No AI helping from off-screen. Real-time response required. Takes 30 minutes.

3

You See Evidence

Watch the recording. See how they think, communicate, and behave. Get AI-powered scoring on competencies. Compare candidates side-by-side. Make informed decisions.

Founders are already using this.

"I saw the actual person I was hiring, not the person they pretended to be on Zoom. Saved us from a bad fit."

— Sarah Chen, Founder, [Company Name]

"Our second hire went from random gut feel to 'I've seen them handle the job.' That confidence changed everything."

— Marcus Alvarez, CEO, [Company Name]

"We stopped doing interviews and started doing auditions. Our quality of hire improved immediately."

— Jordan Park, Founder, [Company Name]

By the numbers

29%
More predictive than interviews
74%
Of companies made a bad hire last year
$17K+
Cost per bad hire
2x
Better validity vs. personality tests

Questions? We have answers.

Isn't this unfair to candidates?
Actually, it's the fairest approach. You see how they'll actually behave on the job, not how well they interview. Candidates prefer this to asynchronous video assessments or personality questionnaires.
Don't we still need to talk to them afterward?
Of course. But now you're having the conversation with real data. You've seen how they think, communicate, and handle pressure. The conversation becomes deeper — you're confirming, not guessing.
Is this for small teams?
Absolutely. A bad hire in a 10-person startup is more damaging proportionally than in a 100-person company. This is designed for founders and early-stage teams.
How is this different from work sample tests?
Work samples show task execution. We show behavior, communication, and culture fit while doing the task. The combination makes it 29% more predictive than interviews alone.
Can candidates game this?
Not really. It's live and synchronous. They can't pre-script answers because avatars ask dynamic follow-ups. They can't get AI help from off-screen because responses are required in real time.
How long until I get results?
Create scenario (15 min) → candidates go through (30 min) → you review and score (same day). Not weeks. Not a sales process. You get answers fast.