Business & Legal Be the best tool for one vertical, not an acceptable one for all
Builds systems that make hiring decisions better
Pace could try to serve every kind of hiring, or it could be the unmistakably best tool for technical interviews and own that vertical completely. A horizontal tool that is acceptable everywhere loses to a vertical tool that is excellent in one place, because the buyer in that place feels it was built for them. Narrowing the target sharpens the features, the copy, and the demo all at once. Pick the one vertical where you can be the obvious best choice, win it, and expand from a position of strength rather than spreading thin from the start.
Related advice
Flavius D. Price against the cost of the mistake, not your competitors
For tools that sit on top of high-stakes decisions (hiring, compliance, security, legal), the wrong benchmark is competitor pricing. The right benchmark is the cost of one bad outcome. Pace is built for hiring, where a single bad hire typically costs one to two times the annual salary once you factor in ramp, opportunity cost, severance, and team drag. A tool that prevents one bad hire a year is paying for itself many times over at almost any price. Teach your prospects to do that math in the first five minutes of the demo, and pricing objections mostly go away.
Flavius D. Encode the best practice so the right path is the easy one
Everyone agrees structured interviews work, and almost nobody runs them, because doing it right is inconvenient under pressure. Pace closes that gap by building the framework into the workflow, so the structured interview becomes the path of least resistance instead of a discipline you have to summon. The richest product territory is any practice that experts endorse and operators skip because it is annoying: automated tests, double-entry bookkeeping, security keys, structured interviews. Build the tool that makes the correct thing the easy thing, and the onboarding pitch writes itself.
Flavius D. Automate the operational tax, not the human judgment
Pace does not decide who gets hired; it removes the 40 minutes of note-taking, write-ups, and scorecard wrangling around each interview so the human can focus on judgment. For tools that sit on high-stakes human decisions, that line matters: automate the busywork that surrounds the decision, and leave the decision to the person. Buyers trust a tool that makes them faster far more than one that tries to replace their judgment, and the busywork is where the real time is lost anyway. Find the operational tax around the decision and kill it, but keep your hands off the decision itself.
Flavius D. Score interview performance and job fit as separate axes
Pace scores every candidate on two independent axes: how they performed in the interview, and how well they fit the role. A strong performer who is a poor fit and a weak performer who is a great fit are different decisions, and averaging them into one number erases exactly the information you need. Whenever you are evaluating something multi-dimensional (a hire, a feature, a deal), resist the single composite score. Keep the axes separate so you can see the trade-off you are actually making instead of hiding it inside an average.