No demographic data, ever
We never see your age, gender, or background. There is nothing there to be biased by.
What people are wired for is real, measurable, and proven.
Every job runs on skill and will. The interview already covers skill, so this measures the other half: what kinds of work a person is truly wired for.
The method
A measurable map of what a person is wired for.
Decades of behavioral science sort work into six kinds. A short, validated questionnaire, the same questions in the same order for everyone, reads which kinds of work a person naturally settles on. No resume, no skills test, no age, gender, or background, just one honest signal: what someone's wired for. It tells us where they'll have momentum, never that they'll succeed, skill decides that.
Those six are the foundation. A real role runs on several at once, so we read it as nine demands, the six plus a few common combinations, so no kind of work gets missed. Then we match a person to the role on those same six.
R
Realistic
Hands-on work, building, fixing, operating
Staying hands-on while doing everything else
Long stretches of solo focus
I
Investigative
Analyzing, researching, solving complex problems
Finding new ways when the obvious path is blocked
Deciding before all the data is in
A
Artistic
Creating, designing, expressing ideas
Navigating without a clear plan
Setting your own direction
S
Social
Teaching, helping, mentoring, collaborating
Growing other people
Convincing people who don't report to you
E
Enterprising
Leading, persuading, taking initiative
Walking into disagreements instead of around them
Being 'on' for people outside the company
C
Conventional
Organizing, following systems, maintaining standards
Following the system, every time
Working within rules that slow things down
Not a personality test
You've seen the four-letter type. This is the opposite of that.
A personality test sorts everyone into one fixed box. We change the box for every role.
Korture
DISC
MBTI
Predictive Index
Changes per role
Yes, demands chosen per JD
No
No
Partly (manual job target)
Shows trade-offs
Yes, every demand
No
No
No
Evidence for each read
Yes, traced to the JD
No
No
No
Time for the candidate
7 min
10-15 min
20-30 min
6-10 min
Science underneath
Work-interest model, 70+ years
Marston theory (1928)
Jung/Briggs (1962)
PI proprietary
Can candidates game it?
Very hard, forced-choice
Easy
Easy
Somewhat
Cost
$4 per scan
$200-2,000/yr
$200-2,000/yr
$4,950+/yr
Changes per role
Yes, demands chosen per JD
Compare with others
DISCNo
MBTINo
Predictive IndexPartly (manual job target)
Shows trade-offs
Yes, every demand
Compare with others
DISCNo
MBTINo
Predictive IndexNo
Evidence for each read
Yes, traced to the JD
Compare with others
DISCNo
MBTINo
Predictive IndexNo
Time for the candidate
7 min
Compare with others
DISC10-15 min
MBTI20-30 min
Predictive Index6-10 min
Science underneath
Work-interest model, 70+ years
Compare with others
DISCMarston theory (1928)
MBTIJung/Briggs (1962)
Predictive IndexPI proprietary
Can candidates game it?
Very hard, forced-choice
Compare with others
DISCEasy
MBTIEasy
Predictive IndexSomewhat
Cost
$4 per scan
Compare with others
DISC$200-2,000/yr
MBTI$200-2,000/yr
Predictive Index$4,950+/yr
The evidence
The company is new. The science is older than you are.
Two findings from decades of research, and the number they add up to.
2.2xstructured vs. gut-feel
Structured beats gut-feel by 2.2x
Behavior-based interviews predict on-the-job performance more than twice as well as a good feeling across the table. We build that structure for you, so the gut stays out of it.
Sackett et al., 2022, Journal of Applied Psychology80 studiesspanning 14,522 people
Interest predicts performance and tenure
When the work runs on what someone is wired for, they do it better and they stay longer. That second part is the expensive flop you're trying to avoid.
Nye et al., 2012, Perspectives on Psychological Scienceup to 3xvs. resume-and-gut hiring
Stacked, up to 3x the odds
Put the structured interview and the interest read together and you are up to three times more likely to land a top performer than skim-a-CV-and-trust-your-gut hiring.
The lineage
Under the hood is the most widely studied model of work interest, tested for 70+ years. We speak plain English everywhere else on this page; this is the lineage, so you can go check our homework.
Here's what we won't claim.
We're a new company, so we won't pretend to predict performance or promise you a great hire. We show you the interest read and the evidence behind it, then leave the decision where it belongs, with you.
Data: US Department of Labor (O*NET). Science verified by IIM Bangalore.
The missing piece
The science was always sound. The tooling wasn’t.
For about 60 years, this kind of interest research had one job: career counseling, helping a person pick a path. Researchers only seriously reconsidered it as a hiring signal around 2011.
Even then, one hard problem remained. Taking a specific, messy, real job and reading its true behavioral demands was nearly impossible to do by hand at scale. Think of a powerful telescope nobody could aim at one particular star. The lens was always sound; the mount that points it at your exact role is the part that needed the kind of AI we only have now.
So no one beat us to it. The science was just waiting for the tooling to catch up.
Fairness
Fair because of what it never asks.
The questionnaire never collects who you are, only what kind of work you're wired for. That one choice is also what makes it fairer, and easier to defend.
Smaller gaps than IQ-style tests
It shows smaller differences between race and gender groups than aptitude tests, so it is fairer and more defensible. One 2023 study even found that building on interests can lift team diversity and quality at the same time.
What you're wired for, not who you are
That is the whole point. It sharpens your read on skill, it does not replace it.
Fairer hiring is only the first step. The goal is teams that click, and a culture you build on purpose, not by luck.
The foundation
One science. A growing list of uses.
What a person is wired for is the constant, the engine under everything we build. Today it powers how you hire: it reads a role's real demands, shows how a candidate is wired for that work, and builds your interview questions from those demands. Tomorrow, the same science shapes how people grow, how teams are built, and how culture takes hold.
Quinn · Senior Account Manager
Wired for parts of it
The will is here for part of it. Much of what this role is sits right where this person's interest naturally lives, but one of the parts that truly decides it does not, so expect real self-driven momentum on most of the role and a slow fade where it matters just as much.
The closer their shape sits to the role's, the stronger the match.
Interest is the first lever of a growing culture, and you're standing on it. It's where the work has a natural grain, so we read it to aim the structured interview, not to call the outcome.
Put it to work
One read, three ways to use it before the offer goes out.
Understand the role, size up the person, walk into the interview already knowing what to ask.
Role Shape
Know what the role really demands, before you write a single line of the post.
See role shapeCandidate Scan
See where a person's interest lands on the role, in about seven minutes.
See candidate scanWinning people over
Strong
Mixed
Weak
Interview Playbook
Walk in knowing exactly what to ask to be sure.
See interview playbookStop hiring the interview.
Start hiring the work.
First role free, then $4 per scan. No personality test. Built on 70+ years of behavioral science.