From A People Perspective

Martin (00:00)
Hey everybody, welcome back to From a People Perspective. Today I'm really excited to have Shelly here as a guest. Welcome Shelly.

Shally (00:09)
Thanks, I'm a person so my perspective is valuable.

Martin (00:12)
⁓ Yeah, that is true. ⁓ No, I'm really excited to have you on this podcast today. I'm a bit of a fanboy. I've been following your stuff for quite some time. I haven't read any of your books. You're up to three now.

Shally (00:29)
Yeah, yeah, that's it for a while. ⁓ I'm kind of done for that for a while there,

Martin (00:31)
That's it, you're done on the book stuff?

⁓ no, you know, anecdotally, you know, saw you present in Toronto at a sourcing summit. And one of the things that really stuck with me and helped me out as a, as an early stage recruiter was, ⁓ your six or seven points of personalization.

Piece that was the talk that you were giving at the time and I was only using like one or two like their name and the job and then I the conversion rates on my outreach just went through the roof because I should like hey, you just made it as simple and anyways Yeah, no that that conference that summit and I started following your work a lot more after that and it's you're just sharing so much amazing knowledge So very grateful for that and wanted to do that for for this podcast. So thank you so much

Shally (01:24)
So...

Yeah.

Martin (01:28)
Let's dive. I've got a few interesting questions to ask you, but I wanted to jump into some icebreakers before we dive into the real nitty-gritty stuff. You've got, for whatever reason, the only album, you get to choose the only album or artist you get to listen to for the rest of time. What is that album or artist?

Shally (01:29)
My pleasure.

Well, that's two different ways. Album would be more difficult than artist. I think artists would probably be.

Ozzy Osbourne and anything related. you know, including pre Black Sabbath before that and Ozzy, the whole thing. Album would be different. Album would have to be Led Zeppelin. You know, the one that doesn't have a name.

Martin (02:08)
I was the other boy.

⁓ Yep, yep, yeah, Yeah, the I've got a it's funny because I'm in New York right now but normally I do the podcast out of my house and behind me are Three albums from Led Zeppelin not that album. I haven't found like an affordable version that I'm wanting to to spend money on like or one that isn't torn to pieces Now that's cool. ⁓ where's

Shally (02:23)
You know what talking about? Symbols, I think some people call it.

Right, yeah.

Martin (02:50)
It's funny because Led Zeppelin was, I used to listen to Weird Al religiously and Ace of Base is a very eclectic mix.

Shally (02:58)
man, that would

have been a good choice, because Weird Al covers a lot of

Martin (03:01)
⁓ But I remember it was like, your kid to work day. My dad brought me to his office and he was like working at a print shop and immigrant song came on. And I was like, dad, what, what is this music? Like you have to tell me. And that's kind of how I got, got into Led Zeppelin. So that's, that's awesome. What was your, how did you get into Led Zeppelin?

Shally (03:27)
Man, I was little, you know, my mom was a hippie from that era and there was all kinds of stuff. I think she actually dated the bass player for Steppenwolf for some time. So there's all kinds of, you know, like I think my first album that I ever bought was, I'm pretty sure it was the ACDC faces. Sorry, the Kiss faces and the second one was ACDC. So those are my first two albums, but yeah, just hearing it around and then eventually developed a taste for

Martin (03:41)
That's the one.

Shally (03:56)
some of the heavier stuff, which led into the super heavy stuff that I'm into today. But yeah, it went from Kiss to ACDC to Led Zeppelin, fast forward to King Diamond nowadays.

Martin (04:12)
Yeah, Kingdom and... Nice, nice. Yeah, I got into prog rock and my guitar of choice is based off of ACDC, the Devil Horn. So yeah, anyways, that's usually hanging in the background. So I'm in the complete wrong space for this podcast today. ⁓ Let's, yeah, that's good. That's cool. You've been touted as the godfather of sourcing and recruiting and...

Shally (04:25)
Sweet.

Martin (04:42)
There's a, I'm curious, then this is a little cheeky, but like, has anybody ever come to you saying like, need you to source a candidate on your daughter's wedding or something like that?

See you

Shally (04:59)
⁓

my daughter hasn't gotten married yet, but, but I have had requests in, in odd times. ⁓ I'm the one that makes the offer that can't be refused though. Right.

Martin (05:02)
Yeah, it's a little early.

Yes, yes, okay.

Shally (05:15)
They're

the ones who make the requests. So yeah, definitely get a lot of requests from all kinds of, when, when people are ready to give up and they've tried everything and nothing works, they end up finding me.

Martin (05:26)
They find you, nice.

Shally (05:28)
That's, yep,

I'm the end of the road sometimes.

Martin (05:31)
And for the folks that, and I've just kind of jumped into it feeling relatively comfortable knowing like the work and the professional work that you do, but for the folks that don't necessarily know you and the work that you've done, what's, what's your high level kind of 32nd pitch on, on what you do and just help the audience get to know when to reach out and when to find you.

Shally (05:54)
Yeah. Yeah. look, I'm first and foremost, I'm a global talent acquisition strategist, ⁓ worldwide. the global, the globality of it or the internationality of it is important. I, ⁓ I'm a speaker, I'm a trainer, I'm a facilitator. My specialty growing up in the industry was talent sourcing, which is really the, the front of the process.

Martin (06:17)
you

Shally (06:20)
I don't like the funnel, but if it was a funnel, it'd be the top of the funnel, but I don't believe in funnels. ⁓ it's more like the front end of, you know, identification strategy, pre-search the search engagement, all of that. So I would say I'm I'm part subject matter expert. I definitely can claim that in a few of the tier areas. I'm part mad scientist. ⁓ I'm an educator and an advisor because I like to.

I'd like to educate education is something that I've always kind of been drawn to that and giving advice as part of education, but I'm more of an educator mentor as opposed to like, not, you know, I don't think of myself as a thought leader. If anything, I'm more of a thought provoker, ⁓ innovator. Yeah. So, yeah, I've been credited with founding the talent sourcing discipline as a professional endeavor. were a handful of sourcing teams that

Martin (07:04)
I like that. Yeah.

Shally (07:15)
didn't call themselves sourcing before me. But when I arrived on the scene, I think I was the very first one to actually legitimately conduct the job of talent sourcing as my primary duty, not as part of my recruiting job. And then there were, after me, there were a couple of teams, three or four teams in the late 90s that actually were dedicated to research, which later became the first few sourcing teams. And since then I've been building and coaching and guiding sourcing teams

Martin (07:28)
Right?

Shally (07:45)
To distinguish sourcing from recruiting, is, like I said, the pre-search strategy and identification of talent. We don't do phone screens. That's now you're, when you're in the realm of recruiting, if you're screening candidates, you're, you know, on kind of flipping the side to the, to the recruiting side. So my specialty is there. Since I developed that specialization, I've definitely gotten into workforce planning, ⁓ last seven or eight years, people analytics.

Talent intelligence pioneered a lot of stuff in that field as well. So pretty much anything that has to do with the identification, the proactive identification of talent, and engagement of talent, including the strategy and the data of it.

Martin (08:30)
That's a lot of stuff. ⁓ And you've been doing it for quite some time. And it's the reason you have the following, the books and the content. And you've got a podcast 200 plus episodes in now, is awesome. ⁓ I guess, like you talked a bit about education. I kind want to double click on that. I imagine you've trained like thousands of recruiters. ⁓ Hundreds of thousands. Yeah.

Shally (08:57)
Hundreds of thousands, hundreds of thousands.

Martin (09:00)
⁓ and I guess like, I'm curious, like what's a lesson that you've learned recently that's actually surprised you something that's like, kind of like three for a loop or like you've had so much experience and you feel keen on your instincts, but it kind of like threw you off when you realized it went a different way.

Shally (09:20)
So that happens pretty frequently, believe it or not. I think there's something to be said about the whole 10,000 hours to become a, what is it, an expert, 40,000 hours to become a master. ⁓ There's something to be said, I think it's 10,000 and you're like a pro and 40,000 and you're like, I've got more than that. ⁓ And so what I've learned at this level of the game,

Martin (09:34)
Yeah.

It's up to 40 now? Jesus.

Yeah.

Shally (09:49)
with this level of, know, of, sophistication and specialization is that I know a lot less than what I think I know. In other words, there's more I don't know than what I know. And so what, what surprises me. Yeah. By knowing so much, I realized that there's so much more that I don't know that's yet, that I've yet to learn. So things constantly surprised me. ⁓ I would say probably in the last decade, the last 10 years,

Martin (10:04)
despite knowing so much.

Shally (10:19)
The single most surprising thing was something that I learned from my kids and it wasn't in a classroom. and it was actually really related directly to a problem that I was trying to solve. ⁓ so we were conducting a massive initial, you know, identification and outreach for commercial drivers in the great Northern tundras of Canada. So we're talking about really wide open spaces, long haul commercial drivers.

not the one, they're not using laptops while they're driving. know, if they do anything, it's on their cell phones and it's when they're not driving, you know, ⁓ you know how it is. Well, that's exactly what happened. So we learned what was surprising to me was a revelation. As I watched my tween daughter ⁓ have conversations with me about her friends and she named a person and

Martin (10:58)
Probably don't even have an email that they check ever.

Shally (11:19)
You know, was like, if I need to talk to Isabelle, for example, I go on Snapchat. If I need to talk to Magnus, I go on WhatsApp. it's so in her mind, the, the Rolodex that you and I had where I knew your phone number and I knew my friend's phone number. And like for us, it was phone numbers. They don't have phone numbers. They connect an app with a person. So she chats with her BFF on Instagram and her boyfriend on Snapchat.

and her girlfriend on, you know, and so it's like each app is, the directory. So that got me to thinking. And, and what I realized is that we were getting some dismal response rates from mobile outreach to truck drivers, to CDL. We knew email was not going to work because of what you said. I mean, they do have email addresses, but they took it so infrequently that we thought, ⁓ you know, what a great idea. Let's get their mobile numbers. Well, that didn't work. And what.

Martin (11:52)
Yeah.

Shally (12:15)
rapidly started happening in a short span of time, 30 days or so, was that the number of bounces of hard lines that weren't responding, in other words, the bad number, right, was quickly rising. And I was scratching my head going, what is going on? And it wasn't until I put two and two together, what I learned from my daughter and what I was observing in the market, a lot of people, not you and I necessarily,

⁓ where we buy postpaid plans and you subscribe for a contract with AT &T and Verizon and T-Mobile. A lot of people don't do that. They don't have a plan. They don't buy a membership to AT &T. They buy prepaid. And so, yeah, so they buy a SIM card or a virtual SIM card with X amount of minutes or whatever. And when it expires, they buy another one, which means their phone number changes. And so,

Martin (12:55)
Really?

So they got a different number every game.

Thanks.

Shally (13:09)
What was shocking to me was we couldn't get through these people based on the mobile number. But if we started looking them up in WhatsApp and WeChat, they would get the message because that carried over to the new phone. They would plug in the new SIM card or put in the new number and it's still the same Snapchat account. it was like, me. was like phone numbers are at some point they're going to become obsolete. The actual phone number itself might morph into like a

Martin (13:26)
Yeah.

Yeah.

Shally (13:39)
I don't know, I think a blockchain ID or an IP six address for an individual and you can reach them various ways. it was literally a wake up moment where I was like, wow, I thought texting was bleeding edge. It's not. It's not. It's already behind the times because of the way people use the technology.

Martin (13:53)
Yeah.

Would you,

and that, it fair for me to assume from what you've seen that like each sort of industry might have its own idiosyncrasies when it comes to like the pools or the tools that they use.

Shally (14:13)
Yeah.

Yeah, there's some functional industry based things like the fact that these are people that don't really use laptops ⁓ extends to other frontline workers and people that work on forklifts, nurses, people that work with patients, patient care, bedside. You know, the same theory applies, not because they're driving, not because they have the same skill set, but the theory is that those are people that are highly mobile on their feet. And to them, a phone is their computer. They may not even own a computer.

They just have a phone or if they have a computer, it's for gaming or whatever. It's not their day-to-day business. They don't even have a laptop. They may have an iPad, but again, it's the same idea. that, also generationally, there's definitely a ⁓ disdain and a very strong allergic reaction to anything contractual in the generation that's coming up and entering the job market right now.

Martin (15:16)
That's... Yeah.

Shally (15:18)
They

don't like contracts. Everything's day to day. They wanna Uber, they wanna pay rent daily, they wanna pay for their minutes, they don't sign contracts. It's almost like an allergic reaction to it.

Martin (15:29)
And that's for the younger generation.

Shally (15:31)
the today's entry level workforce.

Martin (15:35)
Yeah, yeah, no, that's fair.

Shally (15:36)
the late teens,

early 20-somethings, ⁓ I think they're called Zoomers, if I'm not mistaken.

Martin (15:39)
of 2025.

Yeah, yeah, I use any old or something like that. interesting. No, I want me, you've had, I'm going to like a small pivot here, but you've had a ton of experience with, you know, ⁓ large, massive enterprise organizations. And you've also worked with small startups and I imagine you've worked with small businesses as well. ⁓ so you've seen this like.

Massive breadth of scope in terms of like the needs of obviously like a Google or Microsoft or something like that to the breadth of what a small business needs. What do you see that persists in terms of like the day to day activity of sourcing and recruiting? What's like, what's a universal truth or like that, that you've seen just to be like, this is true no matter what doesn't matter what industry. Um, yeah.

Shally (16:41)
That's a solid question. And I need to split it into two. In sourcing, the thing that persists is creative problem solving and lateral thinking. ⁓ Before LinkedIn, we still did that. mean, there were sources before LinkedIn. A lot of times, modern day organizations define sourcing as an inter-level job. All they're doing really is just mining on LinkedIn. But you know what? Before LinkedIn, they had a similar definition for sourcing, which was

All you do all day is mind monster. But real sourcing is not just, you know, finding active candidates. Real sourcing is identifying hard to find talent in, in, places that are non-traditional. And so what's remained constant, no matter the technology and nowadays with, with GenAI and know, Chad, GBT and the like, it's the creative process of iterative problem solving, the scientific method of iterating.

ideas, whether it's with search strings or chat, GPT prompts, doesn't matter. Right. That is what sourcing discovery is about because that's how you discover the talent. Other people don't discover it because the other people are going to LinkedIn and typing in keywords from the rec. So for sourcing, that's something that's never going to change. ⁓ because no matter what the technology, there's always going to be people who are, how do I use this technology to my advantage? How do I use this technology in ways it wasn't intended for?

but that will help me discover people that are not discovered any other way. ⁓ Now, ⁓ just to give you a quick example, there was a pivotal point at which ⁓ archive.org, which is the kind of like ⁓ way back machine, some people call it, it's the, they upgraded their database to be searchable. Before that, you had to know the website address in order to see the historical archive of that address.

Martin (18:23)
I have a question.

Shally (18:35)
And after that, essentially a search engine on top of an archive becomes a, get this search engine time machine or a time machine search engine. That was pivotal and that was a big change, but ⁓ it's again, still discovery, Sourcing isn't even a today thing. You can source yesterday. Now you can source historical information. So in recruiting, it's different. In recruiting,

what has remained pivotal is the human connection. And that's something that's never gonna go away. It's just changing. It used to be we would make a connection face to face. Then it became easier to do it over the phone and on meetings. And nowadays the human connection is taken in the form of what's up chats. You may never even see the face of the person that you've been recruiting.

But it's still human and AI can't quite replace that because it's a conversation where both parties contribute toward a common objective. With AI, there's only one party and it's you. And the AI is serving you. That's why a lot of AIs tend to be so solipsistic because they literally are pleasing you. They don't have an objective. They're just a robot.

But with a conversation, there's give and take and, you know, changing opinions and everything. So I think that, that contact in whatever form it takes, whether it's WhatsApp, WeChat or virtual reality or whatever, that's going to be the thing that never changes about recruiting.

Martin (20:21)
It just made me think of something in terms of AI where it's like our relationship with animals, whether it be cats, dogs, pets, whatever, is we can have a great, I can have a great relationship and I can love my dog, da da da da da, but it will always be distinctly different from the relationship I have with other humans just because of level of comprehension. And even if AI gets to this other level, if I know that it's a computer, I'm going to be treating that relationship, that conversation, those interactions differently.

And I think, I like slash hope that at the end of the day, people are even especially more so now than ever is they want human to human connection in some, at some capacity, especially along the recruitment or candidate journey.

Shally (21:08)
Yep. however that connection takes place, basically.

Martin (21:13)
What percentage would you say of recruiters are leveraging practices that are effectively like recruitment 101? And this is, it's kind of a cheeky question in terms of like I have an assumption on it and feel like it's a lot, but I'd be curious to get your take on it. And the follow up question is actually more important to me.

Shally (21:38)
Okay, so the first part of it is what percentage of recruiting the recruiters

Martin (21:43)
Retruiters. Yeah, what percentage

of recruiters are effectively just using the most, doing the same thing that everybody else is?

Shally (21:55)
Hmm. I think that most people, most recruiters would be surprised to know that it's, it's like 80%. Yeah. And they would be shocked because they all say they do things differently. But after being in classroom after classroom, I can tell you that there are certain things that, that continuously recruiters do very similarly, if not identically. And some of those things are the very same mistakes. So it's almost like these mistakes are learned.

Martin (22:03)
80 %?

Shally (22:24)
as we learn the job and we learn how to make these mistakes. And it's something that 80 % of the population does. My best example of that is the requisition kickoff, or some people call it intake briefing, whatever. Every recruiter that you talk to is going to say they do it. And some of them say they do it and they don't. They're all going to tell you that they have some way of doing it. That's really special, but it's very unusual to find recruiters that actually consistently do it and consistently do it well.

Most of them don't do it or do it very poorly and leave a lot on the table. And it's the single most critical point of failure in the entire process. Most searches fail because of that one moment. So that's something that, you know, everybody does. That's not necessarily the right way, but you know, there's a few other things like, for example,

Martin (23:10)
Hmm.

Shally (23:19)
⁓ make, the mistake that you don't have to get back to everybody. You know, you think, they applied for the job. They can just sort of get the, you know, the generic, let me tell you what happens when you actually get back to people. It makes a huge difference in that person's life directly. And it takes 10 seconds. And it also has a cumulative effect in developing the brand. If you don't do it, you don't win anything you might lose.

But if you do it, you win a lot. And again, it's one of those things that a lot of recruiters say they do, but they don't really. So, you know, it's, it's very, there's a lot of kind of like common parts to recruiting.

Martin (24:03)
It's just a quick side note on that. don't know if you saw it, but that's actually ghosting has become illegal in Ontario. I don't know if the rest of Canada is going to pick up on that, but ⁓ in 2026, January, you could be fined up to a hundred thousand dollars if a candidate identifies that you ghosted them after being interviewed by an organization. I don't know if the States have picked that up after being interviewed. Yeah.

Shally (24:29)
After being interviewed. Yeah. Well, I don't know, but you're talking

about after being interviewed. So they were interviewed and they need it. Yeah. If somebody, if, if, somebody gave you enough time of their day to meet with you on the phone, you absolutely have to get back to them. You absolutely do. Now, if all they did was apply and they're using AI to apply, yeah, you know, fair game, right?

Martin (24:34)
Yes.

Shally (24:54)
but still, I mean, if people are applying, like when I had job openings for myself reporting into me, everybody got a response. Even if I got 2000 applicants, everybody even got people even got responses when I didn't select them, which were very templatized, but literally was like, Hey, I'm so sorry. We've identified our top candidates. ⁓ you know, we weren't able to get to your application and came in after the, you know, after we already had our top people, please, you know, please consider us in the future. Like literally just letting them know.

We got enough candidates wasn't off for a lot of people and not letting them know costs nothing, but it. Like it has a huge impact. So now after the interview, if you face to face interview, by all, if you're not responding to those people, that is insane. You should be fine. I just have a problem with, I have a big problem with legislating ethics.

Martin (25:32)
I mean,

Yeah.

There's a.

Shally (25:49)
the ethics, it's the ethical thing to do, but to mandate that by law now takes the ethicalness out of it.

Martin (25:56)
Yeah. Yeah, no, it's.

Shally (25:59)
It's no longer an ethical question. it's a, you know, literally, what do you call that compliance, you know, legal compliance. mean, it's not the right thing to do. It's literally just have to have no choice. So.

Martin (26:10)
Yeah. Yeah. No, no, interesting perspective. I'm curious and forgive me if you've been asked this one already, but I have to ask what is your like stack right now in terms of like the tool that you use most often?

Shally (26:30)
I bounce around a lot between the ⁓ four models, well, the five models. I've got Alexa and Siri running a lot at home and in my office on my computer to automate certain aspects of my mundane aspects of my day-to-day life. And then for work, I've got Chad GPT and Claude.

and Gemini and Copilot, but I rely mostly on ChaiGBT and Claude and go back and forth for different reasons, different tasks. I have both applications open on my desktop and I use them a lot. you know, technically that's five. So if I lump Siri and Alexa together, that's one. ⁓ But technically it's five, you know, AI assistants for different reasons. ⁓ You know, managing my shopping list is really something that Alexa does better than ChaiGBT. But... ⁓

Martin (27:26)
Yeah.

Shally (27:27)
Aside from that, I have been really using the stream deck a lot lately. I've been kind of becoming, I don't know, dependent on it, but ⁓ it's this thing here.

Martin (27:41)
nice. Yeah. No, I've, I'm looking to pick one of those up for my D and D sessions.

Shally (27:46)
⁓ it, ⁓ it changes the way you work all day because there's a lot of things you can do with it. It's, it's like macros that you didn't even know you could macro. ⁓ so it, makes things more efficient. Like nowadays, if I need to send the calendar invite to somebody, push a button and it adds, yeah, it adds the calendar invite. Yeah. So, I mean, it's stuff like that. And it normally would take me a few seconds, but if I'm sending out 10 calendar invites, that's a couple of minutes. I know it sounds ridiculous, but Stream Deck saves me a lot.

Martin (28:03)
What?

Shally (28:15)
with these shortcuts and commands that I was already doing only I was doing it with a keyboard, which was multiple keystrokes. And sometimes I made errors. So Stream Deck is one of them and ⁓ yeah, multiple like augmentative automation type of AI tools. Those are the ones I'm relying most heavily on, unless you're looking for more like from a sourcing point of view, from a recruiting point of view.

Martin (28:40)
Well yeah, I mean that was really interesting. Like this Steam Deck thing I've been thinking of, I wouldn't have thought of that for professional uses at all, now that you, like it has so much flexibility and I've seen it, that you could literally use it for anything.

Shally (28:55)
It's a third keyboard. I've got

three keyboards. I've got my mouse, which is a keyboard. If you think about it that way, the mouse that I use is a multi multi-purpose mouse, MX keys. And it's got one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12 buttons that are all programmable and gestures. So I can gesture with the mouse. Then I've got the keyboard with a bunch of macros. And then I've got the stream deck, which is essentially an extended keyboard that allows me to do a lot of things that take multiple steps in just one click.

Martin (28:59)
Mm-hmm.

12 buttons on your mouse. so you're effectively like a professional gaming outfit, but used professionally. That's amazing.

Shally (29:28)
Yeah, like left and right, up and down, forward and backward.

It's

MX Keys, I think it's more of an office thing, MX Master 3S.

Martin (29:43)
Yeah, no, it's, I don't know. It's, it's, no, no, it's, it's cool. No, I love this. I was curious in terms of like your tech stack or your software stack for, recruiting and sourcing.

Shally (29:55)
For recruiting,

yeah, I'm using Jobin a lot. Jobin has, for recruiting and sourcing ⁓ and marketing and email sequencing, it's got a very deep ability to create logical trees and sequences that are branching logic. So you can program, again, you can automate things that you didn't think were possible. Like send an email, follow it up with a LinkedIn email, follow it up with a text message.

and conditionally and with response recognition. So it has sentiment analysis on the reply and it can route the replies different ways. you know, it's very easy to use and ⁓ connects a lot of dots that need to be connected. So it's almost the complete stack. There are a couple of things I still don't do inside of Jobin, but I'm probably always gonna not do them there. You know, there's, I'm always going to have ways that I use.

Martin (30:26)
Okay.

Shally (30:51)
AI to source for me. that's just, it's as completed tech stack as I've seen in a while, including the ability to place calls and text messages in mails, invite connection requests, undo connection requests, manager LinkedIn, everything. So that's a pretty robust one. And proven base is a deep search search engine that is essentially a replica of me. It pretty much does what I do on Google.

It does the searching, the type of searching that I normally would do the real deep web, you know, it doesn't go to LinkedIn. It's pulling from company homepages and bios and conferences and things like that. And so that's been missing in the market since. Well, forever is finally here. So that's, that's the one thing that I would buy for sourcing that I don't, you know, that I can't find anywhere else.

Martin (31:30)
Mm.

Did you, did you have to program it or like prompt it with all of your instructions typically, or does it like come out of the box and it just does what you need it to do effectively?

Shally (31:54)
No.

It comes out of the box

and it knows how to do the deep search that I need to do. I just need to tell it what I'm looking for. So I do need to still, I still need to prompt engineer, but it's a dedicated deep search for talent specifically for identifying bios and, ⁓ you know, in, in non LinkedIn places, basically.

Martin (32:05)
Yeah, of course.

Kind of going back to that 80-20, 80 % of the recruiters out there are just kind of all doing relatively the same thing. given, yeah, given your perspective and the amount of people you've taught and the amount of education you've done over the years, what does it, like how far...

Shally (32:25)
Relatively the same thing, yeah. Very similar workflows, let's put it that way.

Martin (32:47)
How much time and effort necessarily does a person need to put in to kind of go from like that 80 % person into like the upper 20 percentile? Like, is it a day? Is it a week? Is it months? Like, what's the mountain they have to climb before they're like seeing noticeable results and changes, I guess.

Shally (33:07)
Surprisingly, it's not a very high, but it's more like a hill. ⁓ It's really a mindset shift. And what happens is people are stuck in their mindset. And so that's what's preventing them from moving forward. They're just not being, they don't see the forest for the trees. They're not able to see over the hill. They're sort of, it's always been done this way. So it's always going to get done this way. So I'm just going to keep doing it this way because it works.

until it doesn't work. And then they look for an answer, find something that works and then stick to that. ⁓ That experimentation and trial and error is the mindset. If you do that, then it becomes pretty easy. So I would say if you have the mentality, if you have the aptitude and ability and interest to enhance your recruiting workflow with assistive technologies, tools, automation, chat, whatever, it doesn't matter what it is. ⁓

or even just even consider the possibility that we're probably starting off the wrong way, meaning that the intake or the kickoff is wrong, or maybe even consider, right, exactly. So everything you think, yeah. So if you're willing to accept that, or even if you're willing to accept the fact that maybe we shouldn't be.

Martin (34:11)
Assume everything you've done is wrong from the beginning?

Shally (34:24)
Casting wide nets because it doesn't really help anybody. Right? It's, it's almost like you have to, the sourcing mindset is flipping the recruiter's mindset to 180 degrees. Instead of waiting for them to come to you, you go to them. And if you switch to that, if you go to them, it becomes your, if your default is I'm going to find someone versus I'm going to wait for them to apply, then it's a hill. But if it's, I'm to wait for them to apply and you expect it.

to change it's an you know, it's Mount Everest, it's K2. Because you're just thinking that people are you're going to do this and people are going to apply. It doesn't work.

Martin (35:04)
Yeah. So it's, it's, it's, would you say it's, it's broken from day one and like everybody's graduating from this knowledge perspective in the wrong way. And they're just like, the assumption is wrong from the beginning.

Shally (35:19)
which is really easily demonstrated by the amount of attrition and the tenure. ⁓ I was about to publish a research paper and I never actually never ended up doing it, but I still have the data. I just need to update. It's only from the beginning of the year. So it's only about six months dated ⁓ where it was talking about, I talking about the average tenure for recruiters. And ⁓ in some industries and in some types of roles, it's between five to seven. It's some in others, it's between three and five. So,

Martin (35:48)
Cheers.

Shally (35:49)
years. people,

yeah, a lot of recruiters, a vast percentage of recruiters stay in the role for three to no more than five years. And in other times from, you know, up to about seven, but after seven, there's not a lot left after 10. It's a huge cliff. Now the ones that go past 10, they're the lifers, they go to 30, they go to 40, they go, you um, but the people that drop out at the three year mark, four year mark, five year mark, you know why they do it.

Martin (36:12)
they found their happy place.

they've got shit the wrong way.

Shally (36:20)
because they're ground down to a stub. They're ground down. It's a grind that will literally use you up. If all you do every day is look at an inbox that grows and grows and grows and reject people for a living and say no to everybody, and you literally are defensive about your time because you don't want to talk to higher managers, you don't want to talk to candidates, you're in constant block and tackle mode, it is so stressful and so unpleasant that people just don't do it. They just quit.

Martin (36:48)
I'd done with

it. done. Yeah, yeah, that's fine.

Shally (36:50)
The ones that move on

are the ones that learn to automate. They learn to accept it for what it is. They learn to treat people differently. And it's not just inbox. Inbox recruiting is a short-term career move. Inbox recruiters don't make it past seven years, typically. I mean, they might make it to 10, but it's very, it's very grinding. It's very exhausting, very high stress. Or you could do it the other way and it's fun and not as exhausting, actually not exhausting at all. ⁓

But you just literally have to shift the mindset. If I do, you find me.

Martin (37:26)
Yeah. What say, didn't find this and forgive me if it's posted somewhere you talked about it previously, but like, you have like a number of folks that you've placed over the years just in terms of like how many people you've placed with customer clients?

Shally (37:46)
Yeah,

it's so directly it, it's over a thousand, but I really stopped counting. I was counting for a while, but I really stopped. ⁓ more and more nowadays it's a direct result of my effort, but it's not tracked because they're not looking. ⁓ the value that I offer and the value that true sourcing offers isn't hires. In fact, I would even argue that the value of the recruiters offer isn't hires.

Martin (37:52)
Yes.

Shally (38:15)
Unfortunately, when you work in a staffing firm, well, I shouldn't say unfortunately. When you work for a staffing firm, you get rewarded for making a hire. That's not unfortunate, but it's just the only thing you're getting paid for. So if you don't make a hire, you don't get paid. But in reality, you're adding value way beyond the hire in a number of ways. First and foremost, decision support. But in sourcing, I don't even look at hires. doesn't even register because my job, that's right.

Martin (38:18)
Thanks.

Identified talent.

Shally (38:43)
If I have a hiring manager that's stuck, unable to make a decision, can't move forward, can't fill a job because they only have one candidate or zero candidates. And I'm able to provide them with the comfort level to be able to decide on which candidates to move forward. Even if it's a candidate that I didn't find, I've still made a difference. I enabled that hire. So the outcome is that the organization meets its hiring targets, not that Shallie, the recruiter made a placement.

And again, it's a mind shift. So I don't really track that. I know I've hired people in the last year as a direct result of me reaching out to them, but I don't have a, an ATS that shows that, you know, the credit goes to me because it doesn't matter because my employers and my clients, they know the value that I bring and they know they couldn't fill the job before and they could fill the job after. That's what matters. Not whether or not I got paid now in a search from it's different because like I said, that's how you get the invoice.

But you're still, you know, even if you're in a search for me and you don't get the placement, you still contributed to the hire.

Martin (39:49)
Yeah. Given the amount of, know, kind of, I fully agree with that. for me lies with, are there any hires that you've made or even situations where you haven't made the hire necessarily, but you helped the client get to a hire that, that sort of like just the story and, and

the circumstances and the situation stand out to you. So memorable, like gives you goosebumps or just like, do you like, don't know if any, any that you haven't talked about yet that like comes to mind or.

Shally (40:20)
yeah, hundreds, hundreds of stories.

Um, well, in recent years, I was, is one of, I have a bunch of favorites that I do talk about, but you want a new one. So, um, there is an example of one where we needed to hire a, um, chief privacy officer for a tech unicorn, $2 billion, you know, tech unicorn. And, uh, this, you know, I sourced them, I recruited them. The whole thing was, was, was me. So it's direct results.

which is unusual, but at that high level, I usually do get involved a little bit more, not because I want to get the higher, but because you have the relationship and you have to see it through. ⁓ So what was really cool about this is that I was able to identify somebody that was almost 90 degrees from what they were looking for and in the best possible way. instead of looking for somebody with IP knowledge and ⁓

privacy knowledge, I looked for somebody that's had another, I looked for someone that had a different experience with privacy than a privacy attorney. I looked for somebody that was very well versed in the ethics of it. And so I found a black hat hacker that had turned attorney and became a privacy attorney. And she was such a diverse personality that she didn't fit in with the company except

Martin (41:40)
Thanks. ⁓

Bye.

Shally (41:55)
She was so different that she was a really good fit because her mindset and her mentality was enough to change opinions and to really provide strategic direction and where privacy went. So that was a huge, huge win. ⁓ and you know, we became friends and everything, but yeah, it's looking at something completely different. And I was able to be, I was trusted. This, the, the board had allowed me the freedom to go and do that, but

Martin (41:58)
And.

Alright.

Shally (42:24)
to get there, had to do a lot of other things that, you know, a lot of wins, little wins that added up that led to the point where they said, you can have this, you know, and I said, you really need to look at this person because they're, they're extraordinary. And I mean that in every possible way. mean, they were an extraordinary person, extraordinary candidate, extraordinary talent, they would have been at a glance. First of all, any ATS would have rejected her straight out at a glance, looking at the resume. She wouldn't have even gotten a phone call for most recruiters.

And even if she did get a call from a recruiter, the hiring committee wouldn't even take one look at her for so many reasons. So that's an example of a huge win. And I've got tons of that. That's where sourcing really is, stands out. At Fiserv, when I was there, we hired somebody that was, ⁓ that I was talking to for another position. And as I was talking to them and they were telling me what they did,

day to day, it really just hit me that what they're doing is exactly what this other hiring manager wants someone to do. But it's just not called that. It's completely different function, completely different part of the, you what this person had done was essentially that role, but under a completely different cover. However, it was the exact same thing. So at the end of the conversation, I said, can you, can you just trust me for a second here? I'm going to send you a job description that

Martin (43:45)
No.

Shally (43:48)
If you looked at this job description in the wild, you wouldn't even click on it. You wouldn't, you would pass it on it completely. But the reason I'm sending it to you is because what the person wants to achieve with this hire, with the hiring major wants to achieve their desired outcome is exactly the outcome you just described. So what you just achieved, they want someone to achieve. And it doesn't say that in the requisition, but I know that that's the case because I've talked to them many times and they've rejected tons of candidates and blah, blah,

And they're like, sure, I'll take a look at it. I sent it over and they called me right away. 10 minutes later, like they call me right back. You're right. I would never have applied for the shop. Are you sure this is the right? Yep. That's definitely it. Are you interested? Can I present you? Yes. Okay. So then I called the hiring manager and I said, before you say anything, I have a candidate that you actually really need to see, but I'm not going to send them to you unless you promise me that you're going to read the resume, pick up the phone and call them no matter what. Because if you see this resume, you're going to immediately think they're not a fit.

because what they're doing is complete. Their job title is internal consultant and it's over here. what, know, and the higher managers like, sure, again, I'd already established the reputation. I'd built trust. They're like, sure, I'll take a look at it. You know, this better be good, Shallie, you know, like don't waste my time, right? He gets the resume and he goes, I don't get it. What do you see in this person? And I said, do you know how you wanted to do a, B, F, G, H, H, K, L, M, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V? Yeah. Well, he just did that.

Martin (44:57)
Yeah. Yeah.

You

Shally (45:17)
And the higher manager was like, what, what do mean? He just did that at his current job. He just finished that exactly that with even the same software platform. And the higher manager was like the same software platform. Yeah. It's not on his resume. I said, yeah, because he's not a developer of that platform. That's not his job. He was the architect and he told the developers what to do. And the higher manager goes, that's exactly what I need somebody to do here. It's tell developers what to do. And I said, yeah, that's what he just did.

Martin (45:46)
that.

Shally (45:47)
They hired him within weeks and first day on the job, he comes looking for me. This very, very, very rarely happens. Most of the time I get an email or whatever, but they actually came looking for me and were like, I need to buy you a coffee. Come downstairs with him. Like, all right, whatever. Because at this point we're already buds, right? And I knew he'd started and everything. And on the way down there, he goes, I can't believe you did this. He's like, this is the most perfect job match I've ever had in my entire career.

Martin (46:06)
and

Shally (46:14)
This is the absolute perfect job for me the absolute perfect company. I love them. They love me. How did you do it? And I said, I listened to what you did. And I listened to what the hiring manager said. They wanted someone to do. They want to do this. You did this. So it was like, duh. But a job description and a resume is a match made in Hades. They don't talk the same language. You know, so there's so many examples like that where, where I put people in, you know, I knew a guy from Venezuela who was a

waiter at a Mexican restaurant. How inappropriate is that? They're Venezuelan and they're serving, you know, Mexican food. They don't eat the same food. And so, you know, for some reason, everybody just assumed that he knew all about Mexican food. He's like, I'm so tired of this man. He was a director of information technology. ⁓ What do call implementations like massive implementations at large enterprises, but couldn't get a job here because he was an immigrant. Well, I presented him as a director of implementation technologies. He got a job and then his career skyrocketed.

Why? Because I was able to put him into a company that actually needed what he did and wasn't looking at the fact that he was an immigrant. It's, I can give you hundreds of examples like that.

Martin (47:24)
You've mentioned it a few times, obviously, and it's going to be obvious to you, but for the listeners, it's like building up that trust so that not only externally on your own in the sense that you've put in the time and effort to be known and recognized as an expert in the space, but then you still have to build that trust with your client regardless. You probably come in with a bit of an advantage or a distinct advantage, but then you still have to start from scratch and...

Shally (47:49)
Not always, sometimes.

Martin (47:54)
get them to like, you you're not necessarily leading with the candidates that don't necessarily make sense. And those I've had, I've had a few of those moments and it's always super, super rewarding. So, and, and it kind of highlights the like computers, AI, none of you have to like being able to connect those dots that are so vague, but like when, when you see it, it's obvious. And then it becomes a, you have to pitch the client effectively or the hiring manager on like.

Shally (48:16)
Mm-hmm.

Martin (48:23)
Even at first glance, I think, ⁓ it doesn't necessarily make sense. No, that's very, very, probably one of my favorite parts about being a recruiter ⁓ and sourcerer as well.

Shally (48:37)
Yeah,

it's like this. If you have a friend, a good friend, that is very fearful of an upcoming surgical procedure, And they're scared, they're afraid, there could be consequences, whatever, they're just not feeling it, right? They don't wanna get in the car, they don't wanna go to the surgical procedure. As a friend, what would you offer to do in a case like that?

Martin (49:07)
You're not consoling them, but you're saying, like, yeah, I've got you. I'm going to come with you. Ride along.

Shally (49:15)
I'm going to come with you.

That's right. I'm going to come with you. You could do all the consoling you want. You can do all the explanations you want. You can tell them all the reasons why they should do it. All the consequences for not doing it. You can encourage them. can whatever it, but ultimately the thing that you do is you either pick them up and take them or you go with them. Right. I do that with hiring managers. They are afraid of going to get the surgery. I drive over there.

and pick them up and deliver. And then, and then they're no longer afraid. Next time around, I've done this before. I'm old guard. They're second higher. They're third higher. I'm old guard at this. I'm a pro. It's, it's, you have to go where that you have to meet them where they are. Partner with them, relate to them, feel them, listen to them, listen to what they actually have to say about what they're looking for. Not the job description. I don't even read the job description.

Martin (49:48)
I love that.

Thank

Shally (50:13)
when I do these intake meetings. I've already done the pre-search, right? If you meet them where they are and walk with them where they need to go, the next time around, they'll let you go by yourself.

Martin (50:28)
Yeah. And that's what you're looking for is the trust. know, they're at the end of the day, you have way more experience in vetting talent than the hiring managers do to a degree. Right. So, ⁓

Shally (50:41)
At this

tech unicorn, was telling you about not only to hire the CPO, the chief privacy officer, not the chief people officer. That's a different, that's a actually also a CPO, interestingly. ⁓ the chief, but I also hired their second in command in tech. like the number two person for technology for a $2 billion technology company, found them, recruited them, hired them again. Same story. Right. They told me it was the bad. They don't know how I found that. He told me this. I don't know how you found me. Recruiters never called me.

Nobody ever calls me. I don't know how you found me, but it was the best match, literally the best match that he could have made so much so that, ⁓ when this person was looking for a move, I was their first call, even though I'm not even, you know what I'm saying? So that's what you do. And if you do that, it doesn't matter if it's the most entry level person or the most senior level person it's connecting what.

Martin (51:12)
and

Yeah.

Shally (51:41)
they want to do. And that's the other thing that's really important. Sourcing is not about what they did.

Martin (51:48)
What's next?

Shally (51:50)
It's what's next. Because if you

try to reach out to somebody, if you reach out to a candidate and give them an opportunity ⁓ that looks like what they just did, they're not that interested. Just did that. Or I'm doing it right now, right? You've got to go to them with what you think might be a good opportunity for them to move into.

Martin (52:10)
Yeah, reminds me

of Lou Adler's sort of book and like the change needs to, through a number outage, it needs to represent, not from like a financial perspective, like forgetting about the fight, it needs like 30 % of the move needs to represent growth for them. It needs to feel like 30, I don't know how it came to that number, it's been a long time since I've read his work there, but.

Shally (52:24)
doesn't even have to be money.

Yeah, and it's not

comp. It's just that it, yeah, it's whatever is important to them. Learning, new challenges, whatever, but you have to listen to what they want to do. And when you find them, you have to find them based on macro commonalities and trajectories, not based on keywords. And that's what AI cannot do. AI cannot identify patterns that don't exist. AI is really good at identifying patterns that exist, but it...

Martin (52:39)
It's not calm. No. No.

Shally (53:05)
doesn't do very well with identifying patterns that don't exist. It can recombine patterns that exist to create new ones that didn't exist, but it has to recombine patterns that exist. Sourcing is finding people based on patterns that do not exist. It's projections.

Martin (53:25)
Last question here ⁓ on my end, and again, really appreciate this conversation. is super insightful. I don't like the idea of saying what keeps you up at night kind of deal in terms of the future of the space.

This isn't a conversation of like, yeah, he's going to replace sourcing and recruiters and all that. It's more just like, what are you most excited about in, it can be AI if it is AI, like, you know, awesome. Let's let's dig into it. But like, what's, what are you like in terms of ahead of the curve and cutting edge? Like, what are the things that you're most interested in, terms of like things you want to add into your arsenal or your list of special moves, so to speak.

Shally (54:16)
Yeah, something that I was looking for and even tried to build myself a couple of times, once under my own, ⁓ if you will, my own rocket fuel and once under another company is an omnichannel outreach messaging system that centralizes everything. So you can send out messages in any, you can send out Facebook, Instagram, ⁓ X, LinkedIn, whatever. You can send them out in any way and you can receive them in any way, but it all goes back into the CRM. That doesn't really, yeah.

Martin (54:44)
Universal Unbox.

Shally (54:46)
That doesn't really a universal. There are some tools out there for like customer service that monitor, but they're monitoring inbound. And so it kind of ends there and they're more about resolution, resolving a customer issue or complaint. So that doesn't exist, but someday it will a universal, like you said, a universal communicator with almost like, like I said, the Bitcoin version or the blockchain version of the identifier where you have a universal identifier where Shelley is known by the, by this.

Martin (55:11)
University of York.

Shally (55:15)
you know, by this code and that's Shelley. You guarantee that Shelley that, that, that proves their identity proves their, know, you don't need to like dedupe their record. And sometimes they drop the L or they use that IE instead of a Y and you know, all that stuff. a universal system that doesn't track on your own proprietary, but uses the information that's out there because the information is already out there. So I don't want to replicate. don't want to capture, sequester and hold prisoner the data.

Martin (55:19)
I'm to that celly and I've got three children. Then it would you don't need to have a reasonable record. Sometimes they drop the L's or they the PIN in for the wife.

your whom places are you out? So I want to factor in the questioner and the whole principle.

Shally (55:43)
I want a system that's able to identify people in their natural habitat. Kind of like when they tag animals for study. You're not bringing them into a zoo to study them. You're studying them in their natural habitat. So not that people are animals, but I want to be able to tag my contacts and let my contacts be wherever they need to go so that I can still get in touch with them. Like my daughter through Snapchat or WeChat or WhatsApp or Face, whatever, right? So that universal messaging is one. That's one.

Martin (55:47)
I don't like when we have animals for study. You're not bringing them into the zoo to study.

So not just the animals, but I want to really prioritize my And let my content be where everything is.

Yeah

Shally (56:13)
And the other one is a tool that helps me do some of the things that I cannot do that I am unable to do. ⁓ so for example, when I was little, I envisioned, I've always worn glasses. I envisioned a pair of glasses that was able to help me remember people's names. It could scan a face and say, that's Martin. I have a really good memory for faces. If I met you face to face, I will not forget. But yeah.

Martin (56:24)
for example.

Shally (56:45)
Yeah, I remember, but I don't, but I don't know their name and then yeah, and the name escapes me and I forget and people will tell me 10 times and I forget. Sometimes I work with somebody that I've worked with for a year and I forget their name. just not because I'm forgetful, but like it escapes me. Like there's a part of my memory where there's like a hole for names. So a system that would help me with that. And it would help me with things like, for example, identifying color. ⁓ It's being colorblind is a disability, but

to lot of people, it's a joke. They think it's funny or they think it's cool or like, what's it like to be colorblind? Imagine if somebody told you that they're paraplegic, you wouldn't go, what's it like to be paraplegic? Like, you know, it's not the same, it's not as debilitating, but it affects everything I do. Everything from don't touch that wire, which one? The green one.

Martin (57:17)
I mean.

same as the other people, but it affects everybody. Everybody from, don't touch that fire, to partly agree

with the other people. Right? in other countries, money, here are more than just money. So it's like, where are they? So if I had a pair of glasses, if you'd come with your name, it's...

Shally (57:37)
right to in other countries, money here, the money's all the same color, but there's like color. There's so if I had a pair of glasses that could tell me what your name is and remember

that we had a conversation and tell me what color that is and ⁓ tell me when the next time is that we're supposed to, you know, that, that kind of robot, want Claude or Chad GBT in my face. And I also want to be able to turn it off, but I want to be able to, you know, change my glasses and put on my work glasses.

Martin (57:54)
Yeah.

Shally (58:04)
And I don't need a monitor anymore. I can just go do stuff, you know? And it recognizes what I want to do. AI is not anywhere

near like, I still have to be very specific with instructions, even with the agents. Even Claude that can control my computer and browse for me and has all, you know, has access to all this and can do things for me. I still have to tell it what to do. I want an AI. don't have to tell what to do.

That's what I want.

Martin (58:34)
We're getting there. I'm sure we're getting there, but, and that's five years now.

Shally (58:36)
No, not even remotely close. No,

at least double our lifetime, maybe triple our lifetime. Yeah. It's good at recognizing patterns, but if the pattern doesn't exist, right? So unless it, sure. Keep in mind, what I'm talking about is it knows what I'm going to do. Right? It's not just, I need to say what's the weather.

Martin (58:44)
Double our lifetime, really.

I wanna do a podcast with you in five years and it's like just a friendly, but yeah, yeah.

Shally (59:03)
It knows that it should tell me what the weather is because some kind of weather is happening that I need to know about without me having to ask. Because it should know that it already does. It just doesn't think about doing it. ⁓ No, it's not. Look at a CRM, right? Wouldn't it be ideal if the CRM could tell you it's time to get back in touch with Martin?

Martin (59:10)
Watch out.

⁓ yeah.

It's not being built to do it.

Yeah, there's a, there's an interesting tool that I'm a guy, a G I A and you upload all your contacts and you put in, it's like, it's not, I wouldn't say it's, it's the first step towards something close to that, but it's like, LinkedIn's not helping me necessarily do that in the way that I'd like it to. And I'm sure, you know, they, of all companies, they've, they've got the opportunity to, to build that feature, but.

Basically you upload all your contacts and then you highlight what kinds of instances and posts do you want to be notified and then just prioritize it like out of my 20,000 followers. Yeah. So you're saying, yeah, you're saying you don't.

Shally (1:00:06)
You just told it what to do. You just told it what to do. AI can do that. I'm saying that right now you

have to tell it what to do. And that's what I'm telling you. That's the part. You still have to tell it who it is that's important and what for and what to do with that. You're still giving it instructions. That's a big leap. It's just not, it's something a human would do.

Martin (1:00:20)
Yeah, yeah, gotcha. I see.

Shally (1:00:30)
If you and I were colleagues and we worked together, there are times when you would remind me of something that I need to do that I didn't think of.

Why can't AI do that? That's human. You see what I mean? And not because I said, hey, Martin, remind me tomorrow. Cause I can do that with Siri. That's not even AI. Siri's been able to do that for, don't even know how long. It's not that. It's the fact that the day comes around and you just spontaneously, I need to let Shelly know about this. And you tell me about something that saves my, you know, saves my bacon. You just assisted me with something that I didn't even ask for. I didn't even know I needed.

Martin (1:00:41)
Yeah. Yep. No, totally.

Yeah.

Shally (1:01:08)
⁓ like detected my need in advance. That's a supportive, that's a supportive colleague. That's a supportive friend. That's assistive technology. Otherwise, if I have to tell you what to do, it's just a robot.

Martin (1:01:12)
Yeah.

Shally (1:01:26)
Sure, Claude is getting to the point where like can tell it what to do and it actually does it, which is really weird. no, but I mean, like I used to have to give it detailed instructions and now I can just say, do this. it like, go like, hey, what's my calendar gonna look like for the next couple of weeks? It goes into my email, it goes into my calendar, it looks at past appointments and future appointments and scheduled appointments and invitations to appointments. And it looks at my documents.

Martin (1:01:27)
No.

but it's not preemptive.

Shally (1:01:53)
and things that have due dates and it looks at my Evernote and it looks at all this other stuff and it goes, it looks like you're gonna have a pretty busy week next week but the week after that, like, it's not looking for space on my calendar, bro. It's not saying you're available on Thursday at two.

Martin (1:02:06)
No. It's-

Shally (1:02:07)
It's predicting how busy

I'm going to be because it knows how to do all that. But I still have to say, right. I'm training. Yeah. Wouldn't it be great if at the end of this conversation, it told me a week later, Hey, don't forget to reach out to Martin. didn't ask it to, but it reminded me.

Martin (1:02:13)
It's your training. Yeah, it's that you're onboarding it. Yeah.

You should because XYNZ has full context of this conversation and everything like that. It would need more information and more unique information. Yeah, no, interesting. Well, Sally, this has been an awesome conversation. Thank you so much again for doing it. Is there any final words that you'd want to leave with the audience or places for people to find you?

Shally (1:02:47)
Yeah, yeah, I'm,

I think the best thing to do would be to go to TSI university.com T as in Tom s as in Sierra. I as an Indigo university.com I'm I've launched an online community and course to teach people how to use AI and sourcing and ⁓ it's basically a e learning platform. And I'm probably going to be, you know, putting a lot of effort into that consistently over the next, I don't know.

I've been known to run things for a very long time. I my last platform I had for 15 years, but I'm moving over to that. So everybody who's interested in learning from me, I think just go to TSIuniversity.com and check it out and sign up.

Martin (1:03:27)
That's the way to get from 80 to the upper 20, like 1 % really, probably.

Shally (1:03:32)
As long as

you show up with an open mind, if you show up with a mindset of I want to do this, then yeah, it's easy.

Martin (1:03:37)
Awesome.

Now, thanks so much, Shelly. Really appreciate the time, Awesome.

Shally (1:03:41)
My pleasure, man. Yeah. Thank you for having

me.