---
title: "Hiring conversation — charlie-example for acme-example COO role"
type: meeting
slug: meetings/2026-04-17-hiring-charlie-example
date: 2026-04-17
attendees: [you, alice-example, charlie-example]
---

# Hiring OH — charlie-example for COO at acme-example

alice-example brought charlie-example by to discuss the COO role at
acme-example. charlie-example previously ran ops at widget-co before
leaving in late 2025.

## Discussion

charlie-example is technically strong and has the right ops chops on
paper. The concern I raised: he hasn't operated at the velocity
acme-example is going to need over the next 18 months. widget-co's
operating cadence was much slower than what alice-example runs.

charlie-example pushed back — argues he was operating under structural
constraints at widget-co that don't exist at acme-example. Possible, but
I've seen this pattern before. Founders adopt the operating cadence of
their previous company more than they think.

alice-example wants to move forward. I think it's worth a 90-day trial
period before committing to the full COO title. Conviction on the fit
question is genuinely mixed for me, ~0.5.

## Takes

- I bet charlie-example doesn't survive 12 months in the COO role at
  acme-example's velocity. Moderate conviction, 0.6.
- alice-example will hire him anyway despite my concern. Strong, 0.85.
- I predict charlie-example's first 90 days will look strong before the
  velocity gap shows up around month 4. ~0.55.
