And Why Following It Often Makes Talent Acquisition Worse
Most hiring advice sounds reasonable.
“Hire slow.”
“Focus on culture fit.”
“Use structured interviews.”
“Add more stakeholders.”
“Don’t compromise.”
Founders follow this advice in good faith — and still end up stuck in hiring mode, reviewing endless candidates, and making decisions that don’t increase confidence.
Hiring slowly only works when success is clearly defined.
In startups, hiring often slows because:
execution expectations are unclear
signals conflict
decision ownership is diffused
“Hire slow” in this context doesn’t improve quality —
it extends uncertainty and keeps leaders trapped in decision loops.
The issue isn’t speed.
It’s confidence.
This is why founders end up reviewing candidate after candidate who feels close but never decisive. In practice, “almost right” isn’t a talent problem — it’s a signal that execution was never clearly defined.
2. “Add More Interviews” to Reduce Risk
This is one of the most common failure modes.
More interviews feel safer.
They look rigorous.
They create activity.
But when execution isn’t defined and ownership isn’t clear, more interviews:
If you follow the right process, good decisions will emerge.
In startups, this is false.
Process without:
clear execution definition
explicit decision ownership
aligned signals
doesn’t produce clarity.
It produces activity that feels responsible but doesn’t reduce uncertainty.
Why Founders Feel the Advice Is Right — But Can’t Use It
This creates a quiet psychological trap.
Founders read hiring advice and think:
“This makes sense.”
“We should be doing this.”
“Why isn’t this working for us?”
The gap isn’t discipline.
It’s context.
Hiring advice that ignores uncertainty, execution ambiguity, and leadership risk cannot be applied cleanly in startups — no matter how smart the founder is.
What Actually Works Instead
Effective talent acquisition in startups starts with different assumptions:
Uncertainty is the core problem, not talent scarcity
Hiring systems must reduce leadership doubt, not just move candidates
Execution must be defined before evaluation begins
Decision ownership must be explicit
Confidence is the real output of hiring — not offers sent
When these are in place:
hiring speeds up naturally
fewer candidates feel “almost right”
leaders step out earlier
teams regain execution momentum
Why This Matters More Than Ever
As startups scale:
the cost of leadership attention rises
the cost of execution drag compounds
bad hires are rarely obvious — but always expensive
Following generic hiring advice in this environment doesn’t just slow growth.
Together, they explain why most advice fails — and what replaces it.
TL;DR / Key Takeaways
Most hiring advice assumes stable environments startups don’t have
Adding process doesn’t reduce uncertainty when execution is unclear
More interviews amplify noise, not confidence
“Culture fit” without execution context increases bias
Compromise is a system outcome, not a leadership failure
Effective hiring reduces uncertainty before candidates are evaluated
About the author
Olga Fedoseeva is the Founder of UnitiQ, a talent acquisition and People Projects partner for Tech Startups across EU, UKI, and MENA.
She works with founders in Fintech, AI, Crypto, and Robotics to prevent mis-hires before they compound — restoring execution momentum and protecting teams from quiet burnout.