Growth interview red flags
And the perfect growth interview plan
There’s never been a better time to be in growth:
We’re entering a new era where starting a company is easy, but succeeding is exponentially harder.
The winners won’t be the ones who can build the best product — that’s a commodity now.
The winners will be the founders who deeply understand customer psychology, growth engine optimization, and scalable distribution strategies.
— Sean Ellis, How AI-Generated Code Will Reshape Everything
Whether new to PMF or storming revenue, startups want growth.
And they want it reliably, predictably, sustainably.
Nearly every single startup I talk to is actively or soon hiring for growth.
Last week Elena Verna published a timely writeup on good and bad growth job descriptions.
But what about the next step?
What should you watch for when interviewing?
Here’s my list of interview red flags. And, my playbook for the perfect growth interview plan.
Read this if you’re taking a growth role or hiring for growth.
Moves Slow 🚶➡️
Resists Ideas 🙅
Pointless Take-Home 😒
Idle Chit-Chat 🥱
Sleight of Hand 🫳
In detail…
1. Moves Slow 🚶➡️
The most visible red flag is if the hiring process moves slow.
Success in growth demands velocity.
And while moving slow is concerning for any startup role, it’s a red flag for growth.
What does moving slow look like?
>1 business day to respond to comms
>3 business days to hear back from an interview round
>10 business days between interview rounds
Here’s what those numbers should look like:
<3 business hours to respond to comms
<1 business day to hear back from an interview round
<4 business days between interview rounds
(Obviously, use your judgment to make exceptions for one-offs, like a key interviewer is unexpectedly out of office.)
But what if the startup that moves slow wants to bring you in to intentionally boost velocity?
Your mileage may vary.
A fast-moving growth hire might shift a small startup’s culture.
More likely, there’s a lack of urgency baked into the team.
This is important to tease out, which brings us to our next category.
2. Resists Ideas 🙅
As you proceed through conversation, how open to new ideas are the team?
Pay particular attention to the founders, as at most companies, the buck stops with them, especially on high-risk high-reward efforts.
First, assess the job description (JD).
The thesis of Elena’s write-up is that too many growth JDs are kitchen sinks of requirements. And it’s common to see growth JDs rammed with everything from PMM to Sales with everything in between.
If you find this, test if the team is resistant to new ideas. Ideally, they welcome input, including the possibility that the role’s expectations need updating.
The second place to gauge this is during interviews.
Top growth candidates can confidently generate hundreds of ideas until they find the one channel (or product) that makes all others irrelevant.
To nail landing a role, I recommend presenting those ideas — whether asked for or not. Maybe it’s explicitly part of an interview, but if not, I recommend writing up your thoughts and sharing a 10-20 minute Loom voiceover.
Then evaluate: how does the founder respond?
Do their eyes light up? Do they lean in? Do they ask more questions, begin shaping ideas with you, figuring out next steps?
Or do they seem uncomfortable? Do you hear why ideas won’t work? Do you discover a part of the company you’re not allowed to touch? (Hint: it’s usually product).
In growth, the smaller the company, the more critical it is for everyone to exhibit high affinity for new ideas. And crucially, growth roles must be able to weigh in on any part of the company.
3. Pointless Take-Home 😒
Take-homes signal a company that doesn’t get growth.
Why?
First, take-homes introduce massive latency to the hiring process. Even a 24 hour turnaround can add a few days to the hiring process when you add in time to review, weekends, vacations. And we covered above why Moves Slow is a red flag.
If a startup hasn’t figured this out, they likely don’t understand that moving fast is crucial to growth, which is concerning.
Second, take-homes test depth of thinking — deep, reflective, systems 2 consideration. And they validate synthesis of those ideas.
While these skills matter in growth, they’re far less important than:
Quick instinct and velocity
On-the-spot problem solving
Identifying tests you could launch today, not crafting beautiful roadmaps
Is this to say that the entire interview process should be live? Not at all.
One of my favorite interviews is to sit a candidate down with a prompt, give them 40-60 minutes to work, and then discuss their output for 15 minutes at the end.
Killer candidates who move fast will demolish these exercises, and will be ready to talk in as much depth as necessary about their findings.
My go-to picks for this semi-async interview:
Test data-literacy and analysis: Present growth data in a spreadsheet. The data contains some jank. The candidate is prompted to calculate a set of KPIs, such as conversion rates. They then figure out strategic next steps that they’re ready to talk through.
Tests writing and taste: Present customer-facing copy, such as activation emails, in a document. The emails have some issues. The candidate is prompted to re-write them according to a brand guideline to optimize for an outcome such as activation. They then figure out what else they’d do to drive that KPI.
Test hypothesis formation and experiment design: Present some part of the company’s funnel or product, and a few internal hypotheses. The candidate must create a viable test that confidently prosecutes the hypothesis. They then explain what they’d do after the test, given different outcomes.
These are what Andrew Chen calls “infinite depth questions”, where the candidate could elaborate forever, yet you get signal on outlier candidates in <30 minutes.
4. Idle Chit-Chat 🥱
Unstructured, vague, “tell me about yourself”.
Maybe a long walk-and-talk. Maybe a carousel of unprepared teammates.
These sessions are tolerable in moderation, either early or late in a process. They help with rapport, trust, selling.
But it’s concerning if this is the entire interview process.
Reason: idle chit-chat indicates a lack of hypothesis clarity, or, lack of ability to test your skills.
A company unclear on hypotheses or unable to test will be much further behind on growth.
If you’re the company: I recommend at most 3 “chit-chat” sessions:
Early-stage "get to know you” with the hiring manager
Mid-stage “collaboration and communication” interview with a peer
Late-stage “sell” conversation with the hiring manager or leader
5. Sleight of Hand 🫳
This last red flag might be hard to spot, but is critical.
Does leadership talk openly and honestly about their product, growth, and customer feedback? Do they highlight opportunities and challenges?
If you detect this, it indicates there’s willing or unwitting obfuscation of truth at the company.
Objectivity in the form of hard data, and clarity on customer sentiment — is the lifeblood of succeeding in growth roles.
How do you gauge this?
First, validate how well leadership understands their business, and how honest they are with that information.
Ask direct questions and expect clear answers. Questions might include, but aren’t limited to:
Financing: What runway does the company have? What was the last round of funding? How much, from whom?
Growth: What is the company’s ARR growth rate? What is the current goal, if any?
Retention: What is our NRR (B2B)? What is our 1mo and 12mo usage and dollar retention (B2C)?
Economics: What is our CAC? How is that calculated?
Sentiment: What is our NPS or “Very Disappointed” score? What’s the best and worst customer feedback we’ve recently received?
They might not have all the answers — and that might be why they’re hiring you. Or they might want you to sign an NDA.
But watch for cageyness and inconsistency.
Second, validate answers across teammates.
Inconsistency across the team is more of a yellow than red flag.
It’s a red flag if leadership has shaped information to their team in a way that makes things sound much better than they actually are.
It’s more of a yellow flag if teammates simply don’t know the answers. While the optimal environment for growth is an extreme degree of information symmetry, this is a more tractable problem than deliberate obfuscation.
If you’re a hiring manager, be ready to answer, and prepare your team.
The Perfect Growth Interview Plan 💎
Having covered red flags, how should you approach hiring for growth?
This could be the topic of an entire essay, but I’ll focus on interview plan, as this is where most issues arise.
Here is my tried-and-tested interview plan:
Optional
Recruiter screen [30 minutes], or
Hiring manager sell [30-60 minutes]
First Round
Screen [45 minutes]
Onsite 1
Qualities [45 minutes]
Execution [60-75 minutes]
Capabilities [45 minutes]
Onsite 2
Optional final skills [30-60 minutes]
Optional founder / investor / advisor AMA [30 minutes]
Hiring manager AMA [30-45 minutes]
Ideal candidate volumes:
10±3 candidates at First Round
4±2 candidates at Onsite 1
2±1 candidates at Onsite 2
Total time spent with finalist: 5-7 hours.
This works especially well for growth product managers and growth marketers. The structure also lends to adjacent roles like growth engineering, data science, and design.
Got it?
Now, details.
1. Optional
Recruiter screen [30 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Gauge communication, culture fit, experience fit
🌟 Who for: “Low signal” candidates, usually inbound applicants who are potential diamonds in rough
💻 Format: Phone or video call
Hiring manager sell [30-60 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Build trust and validate culture fit
🌟 Who for: “High signal” candidates, who tend to be outbound or referral network
💻 Format: Video call or in person
2. First Round
Screen [45 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Broad and shallow vet across all skills needed in role, and any critical parameters (such as compensation, location)
👥 Interviewer: Hiring manager
💻 Format: Video call or in person
3. Onsite 1
Qualities [45 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Deeply confirm innate qualities needed to succeed in role
💡Example skills: Agency, initiative, drive, ideation, organization, work ethic, taste
👥 Interviewer: Any leader
💻 Format: Video call or in person
Execution [60-75 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Deeply confirm hands-on-keyboard execution skill needed to succeed in role
💡Example skills: Analysis, copywriting, engineering, experimentation, taste, ideation
👥 Interviewer: Hiring manager or “most skilled person” in those areas
💻 Format: Video call or in person; 5 minutes to prep, 40-60 minutes for candidate to execute solo, 15 minutes to jointly review
Capabilities [45 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Deeply confirm on-the-spot skills needed to succeed in role
💡Example skills: Problem solving, rigor, CPU, numeracy, clarity, data literacy, experimentation
👥 Interviewer: Hiring manager or “most skilled person” in those areas
💻 Format: Video call or in person
4. Onsite 2
Optional final skills [30-60 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Validate any gaps from Onsite 1
💡Example skills: Values, humility, receptiveness to feedback, self-awareness, or any other remaining question
👥 Interviewer: Any leader
💻 Format: Video call or in person
Optional founder / investor / advisor AMA [30 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Sell
💻 Format: Video call or in person
Hiring manager AMA [30-45 minutes]
🎯 Goal: Build trust, sell, close
💻 Format: In person
What area of hiring should I unpack next?
Reply or comment ✍️
And in the meantime, if you know someone interviewing or hiring for growth, send this their way.
A good article, thank you.
I believe, one of the reasons people stick to all those "take-home" and "tell about yourself" solutions is the time economy. Your interview plan needs, like, 6-7 hours - and there companies can get just 2-3 hours of interview, with the test task given to Chatgpt for a quick 'yes or no' analysis.
With all the consequences, of course.
🔥