4 ms·

Wow, is taking a job as snap of a decision as hooking up with someone? Nope. So how does the Tinder model make sense for this? Even from a UX perspective, seems

• blowski 13y ago
  Personally, I think it's a great idea. It's been a while since I've needed to job-hunt, but it used to go something like: 1. Scan through indeed.com, StackOverflow, etc, job pages, bookmarking everything that seems interesting. 2. Revisit the bookmarks, checking out the company website, LinkedIn profiles, etc. Select a few favourites. 3. Write CVs and cover letters for the favourites. At step 2, it's great if you can speak directly to your future boss / colleagues. It's like a mini-interview before you go through the hassle of step 3. It lets you get beyond the cliches of the job advert to the actual people. That said, when I've been on the recruiting side, I hated receiving those types of calls because you spend so much time dealing with poor applicants, trying to tell them not to bother applying but still leaving them with a positive image of your company. That's hard to do on the 30th phone call of the day. So it seems that Blonk is trying to filter those phone calls only to those I've already said 'good enough to apply'. The bit I didn't get is the signing-on bonus. As an employer, I would want to get the best possible applicants. The $1,000 seems to skew the kind of people that would be using the service to those who are desperate for cash. To use the 'Tinder for jobs' analogy, if Tinder offered free meals to those who hook up, they will get a large group of "unsociable but like free food" people.