Thread by @patio11

If you’re doing background due diligence on a founder, investor, executive, etc etc, there are far less effective widely used tactics than going to a podcast search engine and listening to them talk for an hour or two.

Doesn’t get you all the signals you’d want but if you care about e.g. clarity of thought it’s quite signalful and, unlike their written output, less likely to be indefinitely siloed or materially the work of other people.

Easier to get signal on “Can this person usefully pitch X to e.g. a candidate?” by listening to them attempt to do that rather than by hoping a reference check remembers that particular facet of reality really clearly and doesn’t confuse it with “So did you like them?”

Also think it’s likely to be far less distorted than e.g. asking them the same set of questions in a job interview.

“We’re curious how you’d perform in our open, collaborative work environment, so I thought I’d test with hostile questioning by a bored person you won’t work with”

“And maybe you’ll be well-poised and affable during that conversation so I will give your simulated teammate the explicit instruction to undermine you and or lie to you. To see what happens, you know. Might not hire based on your reaction, naturally.”