Why this agenda exists
NGA is growing from ₹18L (FY25) toward ₹65L (FY26). Dishant cannot get there alone — not because of capacity, but because of the nature of the work. Some tasks (data entry, GST reconciliation prep, follow-ups, document management) should not be consuming time that belongs to advisory and client relationship work. But hiring carries a real personal risk for Dishant: he gets furious when working with slow-thinking, misaligned people. The packaging business taught him this at cost. The hiring module exists to find the rare exception — people who work at a compatible speed and are aligned to the practice philosophy — not just people with the right exam results. Voice and approach: see Practice philosophy. NGA's hiring criteria should screen for impact orientation, not just compliance competence. We are not hiring to fill seats; we are hiring to extend the practice's capacity to serve clients in the way we believe in.
What this chat does
- Define what roles NGA actually needs — based on what Dishant currently does that he shouldn't be doing, and what clients will need as the practice scales.
- Define what the right person looks like — speed, analytical alignment, practice philosophy fit, not just CA qualifications.
- Build a candidate tracker — a Notion DB to manage applications, stages, and assessments.
- Define the hiring process — where to find candidates, how to screen, how to interview, what to assess.
- Connect to downstream modules — C1 (tasks to delegate once hired), C2 (delegation model), C3 (salary structure), and eventually the web app (staff login access).
Critical insight from working model
Dishant's words (2026-05-18): "I get furious when I have to work with dumb people. I have a particular speed, which is reasonably fast; have a particular way of thinking or viewing things or analysing data. When the person working with me is not aligned to it, it gets infuriating." This means hiring criteria must explicitly include:
- Operating speed (how quickly do they think and act?)
- Analytical alignment (do they notice patterns, or just execute instructions?)
- Practice philosophy fit (impact-oriented, not fear/compliance-driven)
- Self-sufficiency (do they solve problems before escalating, or escalate before thinking?) A candidate with all the right exam results but the wrong operating speed will cost Dishant more energy than having no staff at all.
Connections to other agendas
- C1 (Activity tracking / delegation) — the task map of what Dishant does today informs which roles to hire first
- C2 (Delegation model) — once hired, how tasks actually transfer
- C3 (Attendance & salary) — compensation and attendance structure once hired
- E9 (Approval-gated dispatch) — staff may eventually trigger dispatches (client comms, reports) with Dishant's approval
- Web app (app.ngaca.net) — auth is added before any staff member gets the URL; hiring timeline affects when auth is needed
- The agent system (locked principle #12) — before hiring humans, worth asking: can this task be automated instead? The question from Monday 18 May — "do you actually want staff, or do you want better AI tools that operate at your speed?" — should inform every role definition.
Open question (carried from 2026-05-18)
"When you imagine NGA in three years operating well, do you see yourself with staff, with an AI-agent system, or both?" — Dishant has not yet answered this. The hiring chat should surface it early, because the answer changes what roles make sense to hire for vs. what to automate.
Status
Planned. Chat opening 2026-05-25. Active build begins when the chat completes the role-definition phase and a candidate tracker DB is designed.
Notes
To be added as the work proceeds. <database url="https://www.notion.so/85661ab3b0a3437b8c87a2138eae5025" inline="false" data-source-url="collection://795e2834-5451-4530-b55f-2512f2af4c0a">Candidate Tracker — Article Trainees</database>