This CEO’s Controversial Interview Tactic Could Be the Secret to Hiring the Right People: ‘Wondering If I’m Insane or Brilliant’
Gagan Biyani calls job candidates’ reactions “the most telling part” of the interview.
Gagan Biyani calls job candidates’ reactions “the most telling part” of the interview.
Gagan Biyani, CEO of the education platform Maven and cofounder of Udemy, is drawing attention for an interview tactic that delivers blunt, real-time feedback to candidates—sometimes in front of a panel, other times in a private one-on-one conversation. He then uses their immediate reaction as a key signal of whether they should move forward in the hiring process.
In recent posts on X and LinkedIn, Biyani explained that this “direct feedback” segment has become, in his view, the most revealing part of the interview. Candidates who shut down, appear offended, or struggle to respond in the moment often indicate a poor fit, he said. Conversely, candidates who lean into the feedback and treat it as an opportunity to improve tend to rise to the top.
“Does anyone else do this? I’m wondering if I’m insane or brilliant,” he wrote.
Biyani emphasized that he typically reserves this feedback for candidates he is already inclined to advance, or for those he liked but believes may not be the right match for the specific role. The goal, he said, is to assess whether candidates can process input quickly and adjust their approach in real time. “No matter what, we expect the candidate to take the feedback in real-time and change their answers from then on out,” he added.
A Divisive Technique
The response online has been mixed. Some professionals argued that Biyani’s method is a powerful way to identify resilient, adaptable employees who thrive on direct communication and iterative improvement.
Others were sharply critical. The top comment on LinkedIn challenged the idea that the technique evaluates coachability at all, suggesting instead that it rewards candidates who can suppress natural stress responses—including feelings of humiliation or threat—because they want the job.
Career coach Kyle Elliott echoed those concerns in an interview with Fortune, calling the approach reminiscent of an “insensitive science experiment.” He noted that the feedback dynamic is inherently one-sided and introduced without established rapport, while the candidate’s reaction directly affects their chances of being hired.
“If your company doesn’t care about psychological safety and likes to put people on the spot… I suppose you could run this test,” Elliott said.
The Broader Conversation
Biyani’s approach taps into a larger debate about what modern hiring should optimize for: adaptability and resilience, or psychological safety and fairness. As companies experiment with new methods to evaluate talent—amid rising concerns about AI-generated responses and overly polished interviews—leaders are grappling with where to draw the line between revealing assessments and counterproductive pressure.
Whether Biyani’s method will gain traction remains to be seen. For now, it has certainly sparked a conversation about the balance between directness and respect in the hiring process.