本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

intake-meeting

Run a recruiter-hiring manager intake meeting to kick off a search. Use when the user says "I need to kick off hiring", "run the intake call", "prepare for the intake meeting", "align with the hiring manager on this role", "we're opening a req", or wants to define hiring criteria and process before sourcing begins - even if they don't explicitly say "intake meeting". Also use when a recruiter needs to get a hiring manager aligned on what "great" looks like before anyone talks to a single candidate.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md8.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Overview

Based on Who: The A Method for Hiring (Smart & Street) and Topgrading (Bradford Smart). The intake meeting is where the search either succeeds or fails. A recruiter who starts sourcing without a clear scorecard and aligned process will either bring the wrong candidates or have the hiring manager override the criteria halfway through. The intake locks in: what we're hiring for, how we'll evaluate it, and what success looks like.

Workflow

Step 1: Prepare Before the Meeting

Do not walk into intake cold. Pull what you can in advance:

  • Read the job description draft (if it exists)
  • Review the team org chart: who does this role report to, who are the peers?
  • Look at LinkedIn profiles of strong recent hires in similar roles - bring 2-3 as calibration examples
  • Understand the business context: why is this role open now? Backfill, new headcount, or growth?

Prepare your intake template before the call so you're capturing live, not reconstructing from memory.

Step 2: Align on the Why and the Urgency

Start the meeting here. The "why now" shapes sourcing urgency and candidate bar.

Questions:

  • "Why is this role open right now? Backfill, net new, or strategic expansion?"
  • "What happens to the team or the business if this seat stays empty for 90 days?"
  • "Is there a hard deadline - a product launch, a funding milestone, a customer commitment - that makes timing critical?"
  • "What's the timeline we're working toward? First interviews by [date], offer by [date]?"

Document the answers. Urgency determines how aggressive sourcing needs to be and whether the hiring manager will prioritize interview scheduling.

Step 3: Define Outcomes (Not Requirements)

This is the core of the intake. Most hiring managers come with a list of requirements ("5 years experience, worked at a large company, knows Python"). Push past the requirements to outcomes.

Questions:

  • "If you hired this person today and they crushed it in year one, what would they have done?"
  • "What does the first 90-day ramp look like? What do they own on day 1 vs. day 90?"
  • "What's the hardest problem this person will face in the first 6 months?"
  • "What does failure look like in this role? What's the most common way people underperform?"

Capture 3-5 performance outcomes. These become the foundation of the scorecard.

Step 4: Define the Competencies and the Bar

Turn outcomes into competencies. For each outcome, ask: "What capability does someone need to achieve this?"

Then calibrate the bar:

  • "On a scale of A, B, C - what's the minimum bar you'd accept? Would you take a B on [competency] if they were an A on [more critical competency]?"
  • "Show me the best person you've hired in a similar role. What made them great?"
  • "Show me the worst hire in a similar role. What did you miss in the interview?"

Identify the 1-2 "must-have A" competencies (the ones where a C is an automatic no-hire) vs. the "acceptable B" competencies.

Step 5: Define the Interview Process

Get explicit agreement on every stage before sourcing starts. Changing the process mid-search wastes time and signals disorganization to candidates.

Process agreement questions:

  • "How many stages do we want? Recommendation: phone screen, hiring manager screen, loop (3-4 interviewers), offer."
  • "Who are the interviewers in the loop? Assign them to specific scorecard competencies."
  • "What's the debrief format? I recommend independent scorecard submission before any discussion."
  • "What's the expected interview timeline? How quickly can you respond to my shortlist?"

Agree on turnaround commitments:

  • Recruiter: shortlist within [X] days of opening the req
  • Hiring manager: respond to shortlist within [48 hours]
  • Interview scheduling: candidates get their loop within [5 business days of passing the screen]
  • Debrief and decision: within [48 hours] of completing the loop

These aren't just courtesy - slow loops lose A players.

Step 6: Calibrate on Comp and Offer

Address comp in intake, not when you're about to make an offer.

Questions:

  • "What's the comp band for this role?"
  • "What was the last person in this role paid? What are peers paid internally?"
  • "Is there equity on offer? What's the grant range?"
  • "Do we have flexibility at the top of band for exceptional candidates?"
  • "Will you support a comp exception if the market requires it?"

Get explicit answers. Discovering a comp mismatch at the offer stage is a sourcing failure that could have been prevented here.

Step 7: Capture and Send the Intake Summary

Within 24 hours of the intake meeting, send a summary doc to [hiring manager] for alignment:

# Intake Summary: [Role Title]

Date: [Date]
Recruiter: [Your name]
Hiring Manager: [Name]

## Why This Role / Urgency
[1-2 sentences on business context and timeline]

## Performance Outcomes
1. [Outcome 1 - 90 days]
2. [Outcome 2 - 6 months]
3. [Outcome 3 - 12 months]

## Competencies and Bar
| Competency | Minimum Bar | Notes |
|------------|-------------|-------|
| [Comp 1] | A required | [Context] |
| [Comp 2] | B acceptable | [Context] |

## Interview Process
Stage 1: Recruiter screen (30 min) - covers [competencies]
Stage 2: Hiring manager interview (60 min) - covers [competencies]
Stage 3: Loop - [Interviewer 1], [Interviewer 2], [Interviewer 3]
Stage 4: Debrief and decision

## Timeline Commitments
Shortlist to HM: [date]
HM responds to shortlist: within 48 hours
Candidate loop completed: within [X] weeks
Offer target: [date]

## Compensation
Band: $[X] - $[Y] base
Equity: [range]
Flexibility: [yes/no and conditions]

## Open Questions
- [Any unresolved items from the meeting]

If [hiring manager] doesn't reply to confirm alignment within 48 hours, follow up. Starting a search without explicit confirmation is a risk.

Anti-Patterns

1. Skipping intake and sourcing from the JD alone Bad: JD posted, start sending LinkedIn InMails. Good: Intake happens before sourcing. The JD is an input, not the brief. The intake uncovers what the JD doesn't capture.

2. Letting the hiring manager drive entirely Bad: "Whatever [hiring manager] wants, that's what we source for." Good: The recruiter's job is to push back on vague requirements and translate them into observable, evaluable outcomes. "5 years experience" is not evaluable. "Built and shipped a feature end-to-end" is.

3. Not addressing comp until the offer Bad: Wait until you have a finalist to ask about budget. Good: Comp is confirmed in intake. If the band can't attract market candidates, escalate before wasting sourcing effort.

4. No process agreement Bad: "We'll figure out the interview process as we go." Good: Every stage is defined, every interviewer is assigned, and turnaround commitments are explicit before the first candidate is screened.

5. Soft intake (30-minute chat with no document) Bad: Quick conversation, no follow-up, everyone remembers it differently. Good: Intake doc sent within 24 hours, confirmed by [hiring manager]. This is the contract for the search.

Quality Checklist

  • Intake was prepared with org context and calibration profiles before the meeting
  • Business context and urgency are documented
  • 3-5 performance outcomes defined (not a requirements list)
  • Competencies identified with minimum bar per competency
  • Interview process defined with specific interviewers assigned to competencies
  • Timeline commitments documented (shortlist, loop, decision)
  • Comp band confirmed and documented
  • Intake summary sent to [hiring manager] within 24 hours with a reply-to-confirm request

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Design clean and consistent APIs. Use when the user says "design an API", "API design review", "design these endpoints", "REST API for X", "GraphQL schema", "API contract", "how should this endpoint work", "review my API design", or wants to create or improve an API interface - even if they don't explicitly say "API design".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

qa-aman のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する