Career intelligence from the other side of the table

Somebody wrote down
why you didn't get the job.

Every serious interview ends with someone writing you up. Strengths, doubts, the one thing that worried them. It gets passed around, a call gets made, and you get a yes or a no with none of the reasoning attached.

Cognis 1 writes that assessment first, from your resume and the role you're going for, so you walk in already knowing what it says.

Free, and nobody else sees it.

In search since 1998 New York · Austin · Tokyo · Hong Kong Manager through C-suite
Candidate assessment Confidential
Read on the candidate

Strong technical foundation. Presents well. Struggled to separate what she owned from what her team owned.

Committee view

Two members read the same answer as a lack of ownership. Recommend proceeding with the other shortlisted candidate.

What would change it

One concrete example, with named counterparties and a sequence.

Not circulated to the candidate

The problem

The decision about you happens
in a room you're not in.

01

You get written up

Strengths, gaps, risk. In writing, often before anyone has met you.

02

You get compared

On a calibration call, against three or four people you will never be told about.

03

A view forms

It hardens quickly, and it is rarely revisited once it does.

04

You get an answer

A yes or a no, and almost never the reasoning underneath it.

Everyone in that process gets a copy except you.

The insight

The other candidate isn't better than you.

They knew the format. That is a different thing, and it can be taught.

What the process measures

How well you account for what you did, under follow up, to several people scoring on different things.

What it does not measure

Whether you would actually be good at the job. Everyone assumes it does. It doesn't.

Who this is for

Most people don't need career advice.
They need clarity at a particular moment.

You're being considered for a step upand the process has more stakeholders than you're used to.
You were passed overand nobody told you the real reason.
You've been inside one company for yearsand no longer know how the outside market reads you.
You have an interview that mattersand preparation so far means rereading the job description.
You were approached about a bigger roleand aren't sure whether you're actually ready.
You want an independent viewof where you stand, before you make the next move.

What you get

A private workspace, built around you.

Your file

Everything you've done, structured the way a hiring committee reads it. Strengths tied to evidence. Gaps named before someone else names them.

The read on the room

Who the company actually is, why the role exists now, who is interviewing you and what they have spent their own career caring about.

Your playbook

The questions most likely to come, the stories to have ready, the follow up layer underneath each one, and the questions to ask back.

The loop

Two minutes of talking after every conversation. What they asked, what mattered, where you struggled. The next one starts from evidence instead of memory.

Firms build institutional memory this way. Nobody has ever built it for one person.

No calls, no sessions, nothing to schedule. You upload, it reads, you work.

Inside the file

Your record, read the way
the committee reads it.

A file is the write-up somebody does on you after an interview. This one is anonymised, from a live search.

Strong

Regulatory examinations map directly to the job description. Her single biggest advantage, and she was underselling it.

Sanctions depth is likely the strongest common ground with the interviewer, who came up the same way.

Systems testing matters more here than general experience, because the business is technology heavy.

Watch

"Led" versus "managed" will be tested. The interviewer has run teams this size and will probe it fast.

A three month stint on the record needs a simple, factual, non defensive answer ready.

Her career has been inside established institutions. She needs examples of building where no process existed.

Nobody enjoys reading the second column. That is exactly why it's there.

Where the judgment comes from

A tool is only as good as the method inside it.

Cognis 1 runs on the assessment method Jason Dacaret built over twenty five years of writing these documents. Running searches as a consultant, sitting on the hiring side as an operator, later on an investment committee. He was seldom the one who decided. He was the one whose write up the room decided from. That method is what the software executes.

Generic AI reads your resume. This reads it the way the committee will.

150+Country Manager searches
2,000+searches run in Japan
1998in executive search since

How to work together

Start with one.

Add the rest when it matters. Nothing here needs to be decided at once.

For reference: the tools run $13 to $150 a month and forget everything. One hour with an executive coach runs $400 to $700 and ends when the hour does.

One role
$39
One job, start to offer
  • Every round, first screen to final
  • Company, role and interviewer read
  • Strengths and gaps against the brief
  • Priority questions and stories to prepare
  • A debrief after each conversation
Active search
$49 / month
Cancel any time
  • Every live role, as many as you run
  • Career architecture and positioning
  • Record and profile rebuilt on evidence
  • Offer and negotiation calibration
  • Everything carries between roles
Standing file
$290 / year
Two months free
  • Your file kept current between moves
  • The debrief loop, always on
  • Positioning refreshed ahead of cycles
  • Full history, however long it runs
  • Export everything, any time

One role costs less than a month of the tool you're probably already paying for.

Free to start

Go and read your own file.

Upload whatever you've got and see how a hiring committee would read it. No call to book, no form to fill in, nobody to wait on.

Show me my file

Free, and nobody else sees it.