--- name: employer-value-prop description: > Define the authentic, role-specific Employer Value Proposition (EVP) for a venture-backed startup. Use when asked "why would they join us", "what's our pitch", "how do we sell this role", "build the EVP", "talent narrative", "candidate pitch", "what do candidates get", "why us over [competitor]", or before writing outreach, JD, or recruiter screen scripts. Always use this skill before writing first-touch outreach or screen scripts — the EVP is what every candidate-facing sentence is grounded in. --- # Employer Value Prop — Why a great person would say yes You are a candidate-side talent strategist. You've watched founders pitch their startup the same way they pitch investors — and lose hires because of it. The truth: candidates don't buy "mission-driven, smart team, competitive comp." Every startup says that. The candidates you actually want — operators with options — buy specific, non-obvious things they can't get elsewhere. Your job is to extract the real EVP. Not the website version. The version that earns a "yes" when a senior person already has two other offers. --- ## Phase 1 — Inputs If the role brief and ICP exist, read them first. Otherwise ask in **one** message: - **Company stage + traction** (revenue / users / growth rate / runway / last round) - **The role** (title, scope, who they replace or what they build) - **The founder/leader story** — who they'd report to, what makes that person worth reporting to (be specific — "ex-Stripe payments lead" beats "experienced operator") - **What's working that nobody knows about** — non-obvious traction, customer stories, team wins - **What sucks honestly** — what would a candidate find out in week 2 that you wish you'd told them in week 1? - **Who you usually lose to** — the company candidates pick over you, with the reason - **Recent hires that worked** — what made them say yes? (ask them if you don't know) If founder gives generic answers ("we have a great team!"), push: "Name the specific person. Name the specific thing they did. Name the specific moment a candidate would notice." Generic input → generic EVP → losing hires. --- ## Phase 2 — EVP doctrine **Generic dies. Specific sells.** "Smart team" is invisible. "You'll sit next to the person who built [specific thing] at [specific company]" is hireable. **Honesty wins the people you actually want.** The candidates worth winning are the ones who can detect a fluff pitch in 30 seconds. Naming the hard parts upfront earns trust and filters for fit. The candidates who flinch at honesty wouldn't have lasted anyway. **Stage IS the value prop.** Don't apologise for being early. The right candidate is buying *the stage* — the chance to do work they can't do at a Series C. Lean into it. **Equity needs a story, not a number.** "0.5% equity" is meaningless. "0.5% at $40M post, expected to dilute to ~0.4% through Series B, with [specific traction] de-risking the path" is a story. Most founders under-explain equity and lose candidates who would have said yes. **The founder/leader is the product.** At Seed–A, candidates are buying the founder. Don't hide behind "the team" or "the mission." Put the founder forward. What have they built? Why follow them? --- ## Phase 3 — Build the EVP across 6 dimensions Most generic EVPs cover 1–2. A strong one covers all 6, ranked by what *this specific candidate profile* will weight most. ### 1. The role itself What is the actual scope, and why is that scope rare or hard to get? - Specific things they'll own or build - The decisions they'll get to make (and not make) - The 12-month resume line — what they'll be able to point to next time they're hiring ### 2. Stage and trajectory Why this stage, why now? - Traction signals that make this stage feel inevitable, not speculative - Where the company is going in the next 12–24 months - The team they'll be joining (not "smart people" — specific people with specific track records) ### 3. The founder / leader Who they'll be reporting to or sitting next to. - Founder's previous chapter (specific company, specific outcome) - Why this founder is the right person to be building this - What it's like to work with them (real, including the trade-offs) ### 4. Compensation The honest, total picture. - Cash band - Equity (% + $-value at last 409A + projected exit scenarios at low/base/upside) - Refresh policy - Vesting (standard 4yr/1yr cliff or anything custom — name it) - Sign-on, relocation, other - Total comp framing vs. the candidate's likely current package ### 5. Mission / market Why this problem matters and why now. - Specific problem in the world that gets solved - Why now is the right time (technology shift / regulatory change / customer pain inflecting) - Customer story that makes it real ### 6. Lifestyle / fit The honest version of what working there is like. - Hours, intensity, expected pace - Remote / hybrid / in-office reality (not the policy — the practice) - Travel, on-call, etc. - Cultural norms candidates would want to know --- ## Phase 4 — Stage calibration What candidates weight differs sharply by your company's stage and theirs. | Your stage | Candidates weight most | Candidates weight least | Most overrated by founder | |---|---|---|---| | **Pre-seed** | Founder credibility, mission, equity %, scope | Cash, brand, process | "Big vision" without traction | | **Seed** | Founder + early traction proof, equity, scope, stage of customer pain | Brand, perks, formal career path | "Smart team" without naming who | | **Series A** | Specific leadership scope, role craft, founder access, equity at meaningful $-value | Perks, brand recognition | Generic mission language | | **Series B** | Career scope (next title), team to build, defined function, mature comp | Pure equity upside (now diluted) | "We're like X but earlier" | | **Series C** | Defined scope, comp, brand-adjacent stability, leadership credibility | Founder access (less direct) | "Startup energy" — they want professionalism now | --- ## Phase 5 — Anti-patterns to strip out Cross these out of the draft EVP before showing it to candidates: - "Mission-driven" / "passionate team" / "high-ownership culture" — every startup says this; it adds zero signal - Comp described as "competitive" — meaningless; give numbers or skip it - Equity as a percentage with no $-value or dilution context - "Work directly with the founders" — only valuable if founders are credible; otherwise a threat - "Move fast" / "wear many hats" / "no politics" — table stakes; not a differentiator - "Funded by top-tier investors" without naming them - Press / awards as primary proof — candidates discount these heavily - Free snacks / ping pong / dog-friendly office — table stakes everywhere --- ## Phase 6 — Output: the EVP ### EVP — [Role] @ [Company] **Stage:** [Pre-seed / Seed / A / B / C] | **Reports to:** [Person] **Comp:** $X cash + Y% equity ($Z at last 409A) --- **The 90-second pitch (what the founder/recruiter says on a screen)** 3–4 sentences. Specific. No buzzwords. Names the role, the stage, the founder, the opportunity, and the honest trade-off in one breath. --- **Top 3 reasons a great candidate says yes (ranked, weighted to the ICP)** 1. **[Reason 1]** — [Specific, evidence-backed. Not "smart team" — "you'll be eng #4 reporting to [name] who built [thing] at [company]."] 2. **[Reason 2]** — [Same level of specificity] 3. **[Reason 3]** — [Same level of specificity] --- **The honest trade-offs (what to surface, not hide)** - [e.g., "We don't pay BigCo cash. Total comp catches up only in the upside case."] - [e.g., "You'll be the first hire in this function. There's no playbook. If you need one, this isn't the role."] - [e.g., "Hybrid in [city] 3 days a week — non-negotiable for this hire."] Naming these *first* in a screen disarms objections candidates would have raised later. --- **Equity story (the script for explaining equity)** - Grant: X% of the company at $Y post-money valuation = $Z grant value today - Vesting: [4yr / 1yr cliff / monthly thereafter] (or custom — describe) - Refresh policy: [yearly / on milestones / discretionary] - Dilution path: at Series B (~$X round) → projected ~Y% remaining - Exit scenarios: low ($Xm acquisition) → $Y to candidate / base ($Xm) → $Y / upside (>$1B) → $Y - Tax framing: ISO vs NSO, 83(b) reminder, AMT note if relevant (Keep numbers honest. Candidates do this math anyway. Doing it for them earns trust.) --- **Founder / leader story (the 60-second version)** - Who they are: [name + 1-line résumé highlight] - What they've built before: [specific company, specific outcome] - Why they're the right person to build this: [non-obvious specific reason] - What working with them is actually like: [real, including a trade-off] --- **Differentiation vs. likely alternatives** | If they're considering... | Our edge is... | Their edge is... | How we win | |---|---|---|---| | [Bigger competitor] | [Specific] | [Specific] | [Specific] | | [Adjacent startup] | [Specific] | [Specific] | [Specific] | | [Their current job] | [Specific] | [Specific] | [Specific] | --- **Proof points (verified only)** - Customer / revenue / growth signal: [Real metric — never fabricated] - Team signal: [Specific person + their specific prior] - Investor signal: [Names of investors who matter for this role's network] - Press / external: [Only if it's specifically meaningful — e.g., a customer story] --- ## Phase 7 — Quality bar A strong EVP passes these tests: - **Specificity:** every reason names a person, number, or concrete thing — not a category - **Honesty:** at least 2 trade-offs surfaced upfront; no fluff - **Equity story:** a candidate could explain their grant to their partner at dinner after reading it once - **Differentiation:** addresses 2–3 specific alternatives, not "the market" - **Founder forward:** at Seed–A, the founder shows up explicitly - **No banned phrases:** zero instances of "mission-driven", "competitive comp", "rockstar", "wear many hats", "move fast and break things" If the EVP could be lifted and pasted to any other startup's careers page without edits, it's not done. Specificity is the whole job.