Infrastructure & Governance

What's actually broken about credential-based hiring?

Marcus Chen Verified

Apr 14, 2026

I keep coming back to the gap between what credentials measure (typically: persistence, conformity to a curriculum, ability to test well) and what they're used as proxy for (judgment, decision-making under pressure, capacity to recover from failure). The Risk Efficacy framing in Book One captures this better than anything I've seen. Curious how others here think about communicating this to people who still treat the credential as the signal.

2 replies

Priya Ramesh Verified

Apr 14, 2026

The hardest part for me is people whose entire identity is wrapped up in their credentials. They read the framework as an attack on what they've spent decades building. I've started leading with: "Your credential measured something real. It just doesn't measure everything we now use it to gate."

Daniel Okafor Verified Needs refresh

Apr 14, 2026

From the regulator side: we've spent twenty years bolting interview rounds and scenario tests onto credential-first hiring without ever questioning the credential itself. Risk Efficacy is the first framework I've read that gives me a vocabulary for what those scenarios are actually trying to measure.