See Myagi's views on the future of retail in Deloitte's Retail Trends Report

Here at Myagi, we've been beating the drum for quite some time on the importance of technology in optimising the customer journey and overall experience in retail.

So naturally, we were delighted when the folks at Deloitte asked us to be part of their research on how retailers can better embrace digital technologies and enhance their current in-store customer experience.

We were lucky enough to provide our views alongside some other incredible companies such as BooodlOak LabsFluent Retail and, all of whom are helping retailers and brands connect the dots along the "customer journey" — from store discovery, right through to the in-store physical and human touch points.

The numbers speak for themselves — according to Gallup research, customers who feel like they have an emotional connection to the shopping experience spend 40% more than those that feel like they're getting a homogenous, stodgy experience. Helping draw attention to this shining beacon of the retail landscape is extremely important for all retailers and brands, so we are thrilled that Deloitte has chosen to carry the torch here on this topic!

Report Link: Retail trends: Vol. 1 - Technology in retail


P.S. If you'd like to continue the conversation, we'd really appreciate if you could share this report with relevant people in your network and on your social accounts.



What the "classics" can teach us about great leadership

Anyone who knows me, knows I am a huge cinephile. I have learned more about life, love, work and business from movies than I care to admit. Whilst I don't approach movies with a "what am I going to learn out of this" mindset as I do books I read, one of the common threads amongst my favourite movies is that almost by some imperceptible mechanism, they imprint a profound and important lesson on my brain. So I thought I'd collate some of the people leadership lessons I've taken away from some of the "classics" as rated by IMDB. Whilst the tax man may not recognise movie watching as deductible professional development, it is certainly one of the cheapest, most fun, accessible and impactful leadership learning activities you can add to your kit bag.



The Shawshank Redemption: Hope in the face of adversity. Andy Dufresne reminds us of the importance of hope in achieving a goal. Whilst most of your staff's goals won't revolve around breaking free from prison, teaching them about the value of hope — especially under tough, uncontrollable circumstances is an essential life lesson that will prepare your team for just about anything that gets thrown at them. Just knowing that you are interested in guiding them through the tough times as well as the good is a strong signal that can unify a team towards your mission and goals.

Memorable Quote: "Remember Red, hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

Further Reading: The Adversity Advantage



The Godfather Part 1: Know when to be calm and when to act. Don Corleone teaches us that being successful, even in the brutal underworld, is not just about shootouts and standovers. Knowing when to negotiate, question, collaborate and when to get your hands dirty is a critical skill in being able to keep ahead of your rivals with only limited resources. Only when his options had dwindled, or he knew he had a strong position of advantage, did  Don Corleone take swift, decisive action that would have both an immediate tangible impact as well a lasting symbolic impact. Practising constantly thinking about your goals and adjusting your approach based on your evolving progress towards said goals is a master-stroke that allows you to reach them with a minimum of friction — all talk and collaboration often leaves critical tasks not done, but all action and no talk is madness and a surefire way to alienate your people. So think carefully before you make each successive move towards your goals — does it require you to use your head, or a strategically placed horse's ?

Memorable Quote: "Accidents don't happen to people who take accidents as a personal insult"

Further Reading: The 48 Laws of Power



The Dark Knight: The Power of a Symbol. Symbols are one of the most powerful, intangible stores of value amongst human beings. Symbols can inspire us, scare us, puzzle us, make us consider our raison d'être. Batman has made the stylised bat emblem one of the most powerful symbols for justice in pop culture. "The Dark Knight" instalment in the Batman franchise completes the evolution of the Batman from a "masked crusader in a cape" to an actual symbol of hope and justice that galvanises the citizens of Gotham city against its criminal underbelly.  What are the powerful symbols that you can call on in your business that people and teams can get behind — and what do you want these symbols to represent? Many iconic retail companies turn their original founders' values into symbols through in-store statues, plaques, trophies, recognition programs, awards — even on their logo. Find something that staff can truly believe in and aspire towards, then immortalise it in a symbol. Create a great symbol and you can transcend the need for those values to be manifested in actual people — deep huh.

Memorable Quote: "Because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A Dark Knight."

Further Reading: Man and His Symbols



Schindler's List: Look for the good in everyone. Oskar Schindler was a greedy and mostly unenviable character who, after witnessing the brutality of the Nazis towards the Jews during World War 2, feels compelled to provide refuge for thousands of Jews by employing them in his factory — ultimately saving their lives from the German death squads. In this most fundamental of human transformations, Schindler shows, the given the right motivation and the right vision, most anyone can be inspired to strive towards great and noble things. This is one many people managers struggle with, staff who have something better in them, a greater alternative fate, but for whatever reason have chosen to take another path — the simple and accepted approach in business is to just "move them on" and forget. Reach out to staff with a need for redemption, make sure they know you're taking an interest in them and give them the tools to improve themselves — an opportunity for atonement is one of the great motivators and drivers of loyalty.

Memorable Quote: "I know you have received orders from our commandant, which he has received from his superiors, to dispose of the population of this camp. Now would be the time to do it. Here they are; they're all here. This is your opportunity. Or, you could leave, and return to your families as men instead of murderers"

Further Reading: How to Win Friends and Influence People



12 Angry Men: Question. When twelve jurors are sent to deliberate on the murder trial of a young man, all except one is convinced that he is guilty. The lone, contrarian juror forces the rest to question the logic and reasoning behind their initial assertion of guilt. Slowly and slowly, the lone juror begins to pick apart the remaining jurors' prejudices, theories, preconceptions and opinions to finally arrive at a set of facts that are an enormous departure from those that each juror made in the "heat of the moment". Always question to get to the facts when hot heads and emotions cloud the issue is the takeaway here. Learn to continually question to get to the root of a problem and its causes — trust me, you'll make better decisions and people will respect them (and you) much much more.

Further reading: Thinking Fast and Slow

Memorable Quote: "I'm not used to supposing. I'm just a working man. My boss does the supposing. But I'll try one. Suppose you talk us all outa this and the kid really did knife his father?"


Picking winners — Part 1

"Goddammit Peter, we need someone with charisma — y'know, rally the troops, get people pumped to work in this place. That's what's going to fix sales".

"I disagree Kenny, we need a marketing whiz — its our public image thats the problem, no one wants to shop here any more".

"No no no, you're all out of line, I think we need someone with general retail experience. Someone who has done the turnaround thing before. The Brits are brilliant at this stuff, maybe we should look there"

"Its a brave new world out there folks, we need to accept that the game has changed and we might have to bring in someone who can help us make sense of the technology landscape, a bit less of a traditional hire"

"Duh, light switch"

Whilst obviously fictitious, the above conversation between our merry band of company directors highlights one of the most glaring issues facing retailers in this day and age — how the hell do you hire a great retail CEO; one who can drive performance and new value creation in an increasingly uncertain arena?

Just think hard for a moment about the number of factors that a retail CEO has to get right in order to be successful — its enough to make a honey-badger keel over.

Below is a minimal list of the areas today's retail CEOs must master just to be "in the game".

  • Product — "How do we make sure we select the right range to match our position?"
  • Staff — "Are our people happy, productive — how do we make sure?"
  • Stores — "Do customers like coming here?"
  • Competition — "Is our offering better than the 'other guys'?"
  • Finance — "Are we making the right margins?"
  • Technology — "Are we using it effectively. Do we have an eye on the guys coming to eat our lunch?"
  • Supply chain — "Do the right things get to the right places fast enough?"
  • Customers — "Who are they? what are their needs?"

Most companies can succeed by simply getting 2-3 of these right. Retailers need to get them all right all the time. Its any wonder that 5 of the top 9 most maligned CEOs are retail CEOs. Whaaaaaaat? yep, you read right — their companies don't poison the water supplies of developing nations, cause cancer, nor peddle grotesque financial instruments that unleash economic armageddon, but yet, they are amongst the least liked execs on the planet.

Despite their obvious inability to get this right consistently, boards (for the most part) still look at picking candidates in a manner akin to picking horses — everyone thinks they have a winning system or formula that they rationalise to themselves. But yet, they're for the most part, wrong. "Oh, look at her catalogue print numbers to store visit ratio" or "They're a supply chain wizard", "The fourth moon phase intersects with scorpio's nether regions this month".

After wading through this morass of premonitions, hunches and gut feelings that different companies have used over the years to pick their chiefs, it all starts to sound like some kind of alchemy and that at any moment, they feel gold bars will rain from the sky.

So why have retailers gotten it so wrong for so long? Much of the root of the problem lies in many of the underlying assumptions used as a proxy for the quality of candidates and extrapolating these factors as a sort of causation for performance.

Lets take a look at the usefulness of some of the most popular considerations used for choosing CEOs in retail. For this, I looked at 30 new CEO announcements at prominent retailers to uncover the mix of virtues that are considered "important" by the board and sector analysts in making an appointment. Here are the results.

Internal Vs External

This is a hugely contentious one, especially where a new boss is being brought in to shake things up. When things have really gone down the toilet at a retailer, things really hit the fan — write-downs are enormous, sackings happen on a biblical scale and there is enough square footage of floor space closed to eclipse the land mass of a small nation. Retail screw-ups are very obvious and often very public, so the pressure to "fix it" is immense. Boards and analysts alike often debate the significance of "Native" vs "Introduced" species in these tetchy ecosystems.

Retail Experience

Whoso Pulleth Out This Sword of this Stone and Anvil, is Rightwise King Born of all England

There is a common perception that only someone with retail experience can really fix a broken one or realise its true potential. This reminds me of the legend of King Arthur, where only the "chosen one" may release excalibur from its stoney confines. Is there truth in this legend, or like the story of Arthur, does this notion also belongs firmly in the fiction category?

Past performance

This is a controversial one, as past performance is very subjective. What does "performance" actually mean? The goals of a CEO trying to chaperone a retailer into a new era, completely uprooting their image, reinventing their product line, flipping their service offering etc are going to be substantially different to a retailer trying to harvest off dying business units to save the core. Whilst both have technically performed, is that performance really comparable? Secondly, given the number of critical facets of a retailer — especially in the composition and culture of their workforce, how alike can the DNA of two different retailers possibly be? 

Numbers person Vs People Person

Throughout the ages, a battle has waged between the "Analyst" and the "Commander", the Introvert Vs the Extrovert, the Thinker Vs the Feeler — and which of these personality types makes better leaders. Companies LOVE pointing out that their newly minted boss is one or the other of these, readily conferring this questionable badge of honour.

What does it all mean?

Whilst all of these points of comparison appeal to our need for simple wisdom and convenient explanations, the game has shifted markedly over the last twenty years in retail. No longer is it acceptable to simply be a shed where people pay for and collect goods — the complexities in technology, supply chain (such as wholesale bypass), labour market conditions, marketing and many more have evolved at an exponential rate, requiring a vastly different skill set than was once par.

Thus, I would argue that the criteria and planes on which we look at retail CEOs must also move on from pointless comparisons, whose data points are purely indicative of the average (half the time you're right, half the time you're wrong). We are looking for outliers — by definition, the CEO is and outlier. They are 1 employee in a thousand, a hundred thousand, even a million. So how do we stop fixating on the vestiges of a bygone era and move into the now?

The main thing all of these decision criteria have in common is that they are all equally useless predictors of performance — for every successful example demonstrating one of the above traits, when we looked, there were an equal number of successful examples with the opposite set of traits. 

I would argue we need a new set of first principles for discovering great retail CEOs — what are the quantifiable facts about what creates a great retail business today, that are within the grasp of a CEO? Instead of trying to mesh together a disparate set of antiquated, unreliable indicators into a mosaic that resembles the "frankenstein's monster" of selection criteria, we should be focussing on the minutiae, the pieces where we can see both correlation and causation between the application of a CEO directive and the outcome.

I am certainly not the authority on what elements we need, but what is clear, is the need. Retail is going through its greatest cultural and structural shift since currency replaced the barter system — and strong leaders are needed to squire retailers through these turbulent times. So what do these leaders look like? how do we identify them? and how do we determine the heroes from the zeroes?

What do you think should be in the "New World Order" of retail CEO selection? Please leave your comments below as in Part 2. we're going to be looking at suggestions for identifiers that should be included in our Black Book for Retail Revolutionaries

What a 50 year old marshmallow can teach us about finding great staff

In the 1960s, Walter Mishcel conducted a series of experiments that would change the way we look at human potential forever. The experiment involved simply offering a marshmallow to primary school aged children, which they could consume immediately. The trick here, was that the researchers offered an additional reward to the children if they were willing to wait a small amount of time. Of the children in the initial study, about one third waited. Whilst the humble promise of an additional marshmallow doesn't seem like anything to get worked up about, it was what happened years later that made this so significant.

The same kids who participated in the initial study were contacted for a follow up study 10 to 20 years later. The results were astounding. The kids who waited longer to receive a larger reward were, in essence, killing it. They were smarter, healthier, had happier relationships, better jobs, spent on average less time in prison (a good thing!) than their marshmallow gorging contemporaries. The phenomena resulting from these experiments was called the "delayed gratification" effect

So how does this effect us? Well, for starters, always be wary of people only eating a single marshmallow :) . But seriously, given the strong correlation with delayed gratification and performance, how can we use this knowledge to great effect in retail businesses?

Without wanting to push the boundaries of "creepy" too much, there are opportunities to find delayed gratifiers in our businesses every day — whether it be new hires or existing staff, these folks have got a high likelihood of being your high performers, so it makes sense to try and identify them as early in their journey with your company. Lets have a look at a couple of the hints we can use in day to day interactions with people to see if they are a slave to their lizard brain or not.

Consumption habits.

People's approach to "Money matters" is probably one of the simplest and most pure examples of delayed gratification. The whole concept of money and the "time-value" of money has delayed gratification baked right in.

"I'm willing to forgo a $1 today, for $1.10 in  a year's time"  (or in the current economy, $1.0000000001 in a year's time). This is taught in Finance 101 and is the basis of the concept of interest. How people approach "interest" and deferring spending is one of the great experiments in behavioural economics and can tell you a massive amount about how people's brains work in relation to delayed gratification — is this person hostage to their own impulses or can they postpone spending (gratification) with the knowledge that they are going to get a greater payoff in the future? So without rummaging through people's bags for receipts, how can we glean some insight into people's buying habits?

Credit scores — whilst they usually get used for loan applications, they can be equally useful for determining if people are good at deferring spending, or whether they use credit like it was free money, with no thought for the future implications. Beware though, this data has to be used carefully as people may have a very good reason for bringing forward purchases on credit, so use your discretion. For instance, are they using the money on investments, education and the like ? (other signs of delayed gratification) or to buy a new handbag? or the latest model car?

This one is hardly scientific, so take it with a grain of salt, but everyone knows people who complain about money a lot but always appear to have the "latest and greatest". Miraculously, bad luck often befalls these people in other parts of their life as well — whilst, yes, people do have bad luck, people who operate like a pinball being bounced around from one impulsive activity to the next often fail to plan for the future, assess future risks and mitigate accordingly.

Another aspect of this is their proactivity around the finances of the company. Do they suggest making pricing changes that will result in greater gross margin? Are they competent with unit economics and think about adjusting different variables in order to maximise future profits? Are they clever about how they use company resources to get the greatest utility out of them?

Hobbies and Skill Mastery.

I'm certainly not suggesting to take a cynical view on what hobbies people choose. Hobbies should be just that, fun pursuits that are stimulating, relaxing and joyful, however, some hobbies are better indicators than others of a leaning towards delayed gratification.

Is there a "mastery" involved with that hobby that takes a great deal of time and dedication to achieve? Not to dis teabag collecting, floral decoupage or whiskey tasting, but you've kinda mastered them on day 1. Hobbies like martial arts, developing open source software, golf, surfing, learning a language beat the crap out of you for the first couple of years before you really get anywhere and do/make anything that resembles competency at it. Whilst an absence of these kinds of activities isn't a deal breaker, they are a great way to determine if people are happy to put in a lot of effort for little up-front payback and a confidence they'll pay-off in the future. A slight caveat to this one, hobbies can also be a negative indicator. Know people who have a gazillion hobbies they start and never take anywhere ? If you see photos of someone's garage that is a graveyard of rollerblades, half-finished woodwork, skateboards, kiteboards, welding equipment, frankenstein like car restorations — run, don't walk away from that person.

Strong link between their "dream path" and their chosen studies, jobs and hobbies.

Lots of people want to be an actor. Less than 1/500 actually "make it" into an acting role, and even then, 90% of actual actors are considered unemployed at any one time. When you dive into the tales of how many actors started out, there is a consistent theme of them taking positions that were not exactly what they wanted to do, but helped them learn their craft and exposed them to the right people that they could sponge off — often for years on end without payoff. If you've got a dream of the thing you want to do for a living, most likely, many other people have a similar dream — thus, you're going to have to fight really hard to get there and delay the pleasure of "winning" for years in some cases. So in our context, has the person made a concerted effort to do the hard things that will give them an edge over other people in what they want to do? Can you map the sacrifices they've made in the past in order to "win" a bigger payoff in the future? Are they interested in their job as a paycheque or is it a learning opportunity? It takes ZERO effort to broadcast some lofty goal to people — is this person the kind of person who follows through on that goal or one that constantly vacillates between options, unprepared to play the "long game" and always looking for the quick payoff ?

Whilst this is somewhat of a simplistic view of performance and is by no means a silver bullet, this knowledge can give us an enormous head start in whittling down the top performers who will continue to grow and grow and persistently create new value for your business. So what are you waiting for, rush out and grab that pack of marshmallows now!

Creating a recruitment honeypot for retail companies

Creating a workplace where great people are banging down the door to work, should be the goal of any hiring manager. Anyone who has worked with an incredible person on their team will attest the the transformational effect of bagging one of these "unicorns". Incredible staff members not only continually redefine their own already exceptionally high standards, but lift the standard of the everyone around them -- so naturally, everyone wants as many of them as they can attract on their team.

The reality though, is that finding great people is a pain in the unicorn's grey coloured, dehorned cousin. Any manager or leader who has hired their fair share of people will shudder at the time wasted sifting through the unfit, the unwilling and the uncouth in order to uncover some flecks of gold in the process.

There are generally two prevailing philosophies of hiring managers in companies who are not attracting inbound "A player" candidates.

The first are the hiring managers that believe attracting top-notch inbound recruits is confined to the rarified air of the "Apples" and the "Nordstroms" of the world and that one should stick to the predictable institutionalised drudgery of casting a wide net and hoping for the best. Simply, this is the "we're not worthy" approach.

The second and contrarian view is one where hiring managers believe great people should simply present forthwith given the "cornucopia" of reasons laid out in their job advertisement. "Exciting workplace!", "Immense opportunity", "Discounted parking" -- how could one not be positively giddy at such promises of transcendent experiences.

In many ways, its easier to edit what we already have than starting an entirely blank slate, so lets dissect some of the common pitfalls with the approaches above to find areas we can tighten up. The good news is that paring back what types of activities you do probably means less work for you -- and probably on more fulfilling things! 

The things we do, that we probably shouldn't.

"Of course we're unique".

Mission statements, vision manifestos, ancient parchments with prophecies from our evangelisation team -- check! Every company has these, and over time, most (not all) have been tainted by the hands of successive management teams trying to put their own spin on the company's purpose. Unfortunately, these artefacts of "company culture" are often the first interactions prospective candidates have with your company. If they are dripping homogeneity, so will the opportunity. Don't use them, or make a specific one for hiring that really cuts to the soul, the raison d'être of your company (and if possible, specifically the position). A strong, distinguishable mission or overriding purpose has been shown to be the primary attractor of high-quality people to a company in the first instance, thus, this has to be in order just to be in the game.

"Just this once...".

Hiring one average employee to fill a void is a common trap. Everyone has demands -- orders to fill, customers to serve, tills to be rung and conventional wisdom suggests that its better to have somebody rather than nobody. Wrong. Putting even one average staff member into the mix is like letting one child with head lice loose into the playground -- everything looks alright initially, but soon enough everyone starts to itch. Estimates put the amount of supervisor time spent managing sub-optimal staff at 17 hours per week, research also shows bad employees are the leading cause of top employees leaving. Find systems for automating manual tasks, educate staff how to better handle multiple customer interactions, but just don't hire "average" ... ever.

"Cast a wide net".

Casting a wide net is great, especially if your company makes money from selling an assortment of sea creatures to restaurants and fish mongers -- if not, leave this approach on the wharf. Brilliant employees know when they're getting thrown in to the mix with every other "Tom, Dick and Harry". Pardon the liberal use of fish metaphors, but to top performers the whole stinks like a bucket of day old cod that's been left in the sun. Great employees will always have their pick of positions, so why would you even get a look in if they feel like they're going to be treated like a cog in a machine. Instead of casting a wide net, select a handful of channels and strategies to pursue that show potential candidates that they're not only special, but also that you get them. For instance, a job ad with boilerplate copy on Monster is probably not going to cut it. Thats not to say don't use Monster or any other online job board, but is it the best medium for articulating why you're different? See here for an entertaining example of how a "well worn" channel can be used effectively.

Enough of what not to do, what additional measures should we be taking to help attract more impressive candidates?

Guerilla warfare.

The success of guerrilla warfare is predicated on the idea of using superior tactics and strategies to out-smart and out-manoeuvre your enemy, rather than brute force or trying to mimic what the enemy is doing. Fact of the matter is that you are probably not going to be able to compete "head-to-head" with the deep war chests of public market behemoths such as Apple stores and Nordstrom for talent, and even if you could, wouldn't you want to increase the efficacy of your efforts and save some budget whilst you're at it? Viva La Revolucion!

Pick your battles. 

Lesson one in guerrilla warfare is that if you don't have the resources to fight on every front, you have to be very picky about what clashes you choose to engage in. This step really belongs in "Marketing 101", but essentially, its the same thing with a slightly different audience. Who are the small groups of people you really want to work with you? Where do they live? What are their interests? What sort of experience do they have? Once you have qualified the type of person you want, you can go about "finding" them. Where do they "live" online or offline -- what websites do they subscribe to, what social influencers do they follow, what "Meetup" groups do they attend? If you want to hire for an electronics store, relevant data points might include a Facebook group belonging to "electrical engineering" students at a local university, commenters on a Youtube channel showcasing new tech products, an "Internet of things" Meetup group and so on. Try and organise each of these groups into a targeted "Persona" that defines the important attributes and characteristics of the types of people you're trying to attract. HubSpot has created an excellent template here that is intended for customer personas, but it can be equally applied to hiring personas.

Exploit "opportunities". 

Guerrillas not only focus their resources on specific battles, but they also exploit very specific opportunities where they can get the greatest leverage from their efforts. In a military sense, this could involve attacking the food supply of your enemy -- this weakens every enemy but you've not had to fight anywhere near the full contingent of their forces. In a hiring sense, arguably the greatest opportunity for leverage lies within the psyche of the candidate. Find an experience that connects at a deep level with your candidate personas and voila, you've created your own legion of cult-like followers. This is a no-brainer that a surprisingly large number of companies fail to inject into their hiring process. If you're not familiar with "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs" or its been a while, I'd suggest revisiting it. Basically, the framework suggests that humans aspire to have a defined set of needs met -- atop those needs are "Esteem" and "Self-Actualisation". Psycho-babble aside, basically those mean you're using your skills and gifts to reach the heights of your human potential. Naturally, people want to feel like they're using their finite precious moments on planet earth doing something that matters to them, so what are the things unique to your position that can help connect the dots between your jobs, your ideal candidates and their higher order needs? Continuing with our electronics store example, your research may conclude that your candidate personas have a pathological need to feel like they are ahead of the curve with understanding new technologies and that it is important for them to be perceived as "in the know" about such things amongst their peers. Awesome, now you have a set of facts that you can use to target the hearts and minds of the people you're trying to attract.

Plan your attack and execute.

Once you've discovered what specific personas you want to target, how you want to target them and the message that articulates "why you?", comes the really hard part -- tying it all together. Weaving a narrative across several channels into an irresistible siren-like song for your ideal candidates is not for the faint hearted, but rewards those who are approach it intelligently and do the work.

Firstly, for each channel and channel strategy, define the key facts around who you're targeting, the locations you're going to seek them out and the overarching "higher order" drivers you want to target for prospective candidates. 

Next, map out each step in the process for each of your chosen channels that you wish to pursue. The real art here, is for each step, you want to match up how you incorporate the most important "higher order" needs that could relate to that step in an innovative and authentic way. I've added a simplified example below of how you might want to plan out a given channel strategy.


Creating a "honeypot" effect that draws in incredible staff is one of the most valuable strategic elements a company can have in its arsenal. Creating a great one that suits your company is likely going to be a process of experimentation and refinement to discover the most effective emotive levers, channels and approaches -- as such its certainly not an overnight fix and you should plan your efforts and resources on the assumption of being in it for the long haul. Sure, like most worthwhile things, its a lot of hard work, but would you rather be sifting through pile after pile of uninspiring resumes hoping for adroit applicants or have a constant stream of amazing, pre-qualified candidates banging down your door to join you on your mission?