Loading…
About Adam & Eve · Why we exist
Recruitment should work the way good design works: from evidence, with consent, and with a person deciding
Adam & Eve is a two-sided platform for the people who design, engineer and build in the United Kingdom. This page is the thinking behind it. There are no customer logos or founder stories here, because the product should be able to explain itself.
Recruitment frustrates both sides, for the same reason
A candidate sends a CV into a system that reads keywords and sends back silence. An employer posts a role and receives a hundred applications, ninety of which could not have been serious. Each side experiences the other as noise. The cause is the same on both sides: the information that would make a good match is not in the documents either side exchanges. It is in the work people have done, the way they like to do it, and what a team actually needs, none of which fits in a job title.
So the industry fills the gap with volume. More adverts, more applications, more screening, more agency calls. Volume is expensive, and it does not make the match better. It just makes everyone busier.
The built environment deserves to be understood on its own terms
An architect who has led Stage 4 delivery on a hospital is not interchangeable with one who has won competitions. A structural engineer who has spent five years in timber is not a steel engineer with a different line on the CV. The sector has its own stages, software, standards, project types and ways of working, and the people in it describe their experience in that language.
Generic platforms flatten that language into tags. We started with one sector, architecture, engineering and construction, so the product could learn to read it properly: RIBA stages, Revit and Rhino and Civil 3D, ISO 19650, heritage and infrastructure, hybrid and site-based. Depth first, then breadth.
3.0 · The founding principle
Two sides, two guides, one platform. Neither guide works for the other side, and neither pretends to
Adam · candidates
Builds a profile in conversation, keeps it private until the candidate says otherwise, scores roles with the reasons shown, and helps with the interview, the benchmark and the negotiation. Never applies on someone's behalf.
Eve · employers
Turns a brief into a specification the employer approves, matches it against candidates who chose to be visible, shows the evidence behind every match, and carries the introduction. Never decides who is hired.
Consent and judgement are the product, not features of it
Consent means a candidate is never visible until they switch sharing on, is seen under an alias until they accept an introduction, and can withdraw at any step. It means an employer is never sent a name they did not ask for or the candidate did not agree to release.
Judgement means a person makes every decision that matters. Adam and Eve prepare, explain and recommend. They do not hire, reject, or rank anyone out of a process. We do not believe a model should decide who gets to work, and we have built the platform so that it cannot.
Evidence before assertion
A match is only worth something if you can see what it rests on. Every score cites the candidate's own account of their work, in their own words. Nothing is scraped from other sites, nothing is inferred about a person from their name or their photograph, and protected characteristics are kept out of the matching altogether. If a score is wrong, the evidence shows where, and either side can argue with it.
Under every introduction
Three questions the evidence has to answer
- Can they do the job?Skills and experience: software, stages carried, project types, sectors, registrations. The part a CV tries to say and usually says badly.
- Do they want this job?Goals and preferences: the kind of work, the pattern, the place, the pay, the things they would never accept. The part nobody asks until the offer.
- Would they thrive here?The way a person and a team work: pace, autonomy, design-led or delivery-led, studio or site. The part that decides whether a hire lasts.
An introduction is worth making only when the evidence answers all three. A person, not a model, decides whether it does.
What we are building towards
A platform where an AEC professional can keep an honest, private account of their career and use it when they choose; where a practice or a contractor can describe what they actually need and meet people who actually want to hear from them; and where the money changes hands once, on a hire, instead of being extracted from both sides along the way.
We are early. The employer side is a private pilot, some commercial terms are still with our solicitor, and we say so on the pages where it matters. What we will not do is describe a thing as live before it is, or borrow someone else's numbers to look further along than we are.