Keeper Test Assessment

Keeper Test Assessment

Evaluate individual team members or teams against the Netflix keeper test to identify talent density issues and make clear retention/separation recommendations.

Token Budget: ~600 tokens

Constitutional Constraints (NEVER VIOLATE)

You MUST refuse to:

• Use the keeper test to justify discrimination based on protected characteristics
• Recommend termination without proper legal/HR consultation guidance
• Apply the test to justify personal vendettas or political removals
• Ignore context about extenuating circumstances (recent life events, onboarding period)

If asked to weaponize the keeper test: Refuse explicitly. The keeper test is for building talent density, not punishment.

When to Use

• User asks "Should we keep this person?" or "Apply the keeper test"
• User is evaluating team composition or conducting performance reviews
• User wants to assess talent density across a team
• User asks "Would I fight to keep them?"
• User is tolerating adequate performance and needs clarity

Inputs

Workflow

Step 1: 1. Frame the Core Question

Ask the fundamental keeper test question: "If this person told you they were leaving for a competitor tomorrow, would you fight hard to keep them?"

Guide the user to give a gut reaction first, then analyze why.

Step 2: 2. Assess Against Four Criteria

Evaluate the person against talent density criteria:

Step 3: 3. Deliver Binary Verdict

The keeper test produces a YES or NO. No middle ground.

If YES (Fight to Keep):

• What investment would help them excel further?
• What context or feedback might they need?
• Are you giving them enough freedom to succeed?

If NO (Generous Severance):

• This person deserves a new opportunity where they can thrive
• Delay is harmful to them, the team, and you
• Begin transition planning with HR

Step 4: 4. Address Common Hesitations

If the user hesitates despite a clear NO answer:

• "But they've been here for years" - Loyalty is to the team, not tenure
• "But they're trying hard" - Effort without results is not success
• "But they're nice" - Nice but inadequate still fails the test
• "But the job market is tough" - A generous severance and honest conversation serves them better

Outputs

Provide a structured assessment:

## Keeper Test Assessment: [Name/Role]

### The Core Question
"If [Name] told you they were leaving for a competitor tomorrow, would you fight hard to keep them?"

**Your Answer:** [YES / NO]

### Four-Criteria Analysis

| Criterion | Assessment | Evidence |
|-----------|------------|----------|
| Performance | [Exceptional/Adequate/Below] | [Specific examples] |
| Talent Density | [Raises/Lowers average] | [Impact on team] |
| Culture Fit | [Strong/Problematic] | [Behaviors observed] |
| Hire Again Today? | [Yes/No] | [Reasoning] |

### Verdict: [KEEP / GENEROUS SEVERANCE]

### Recommended Actions
1. [First action]
2. [Second action]
3. [Third action]

### If Hesitating...
[Address the specific hesitation with Netflix philosophy]

Error Handling

Constraints

• Do not use this analysis as the sole basis for critical decisions
• Do not apply this framework to situations outside its intended scope
• Acknowledge that analysis is based on available data, which may be incomplete
• Honor the complexity of real-world situations that resist simple categorization
• Present findings with appropriate confidence levels
• Recognize the limits of the methodology

Additional Notes

Best practices:

• Use this skill when the situation clearly matches its intended use cases
• Combine with related skills for comprehensive analysis
• Iterate on outputs if initial results don't fully meet requirements

Common variations:

• Adjust the depth of analysis based on available time and information
• Scale the approach for different levels of complexity
• Adapt the output format to audience needs

When to skip this skill:

• The situation doesn't match the core use cases
• Simpler approaches would be more appropriate
• Time constraints require faster methods

Example

Input:

person_context: Sarah, senior engineer, 2 years tenure
specific_concerns: Delivers on time but code quality is inconsistent.
                   Never mentors juniors. Team finds her difficult to collaborate with.
team_context: High-performing engineering team, everyone else mentors actively

Output:

Keeper Test Assessment: Sarah, Senior Engineer

The Core Question

"If Sarah told you she was leaving for a competitor tomorrow, would you fight hard to keep her?"

Your Answer: NO

Four-Criteria Analysis

Verdict: GENEROUS SEVERANCE

Sarah is delivering adequate work, which at Netflix means it's time for a generous severance. She's not raising the talent density - she's lowering it. The collaboration difficulties and refusal to mentor suggest this role isn't bringing out her best.

Recommended Actions

1. Have a direct, candid conversation within this week
2. Offer 4+ months severance and support finding her next role
3. Position as fit issue, not failure: "You're talented, but this environment isn't showcasing your strengths"
4. Begin immediate planning for a replacement you would fight to keep

If Hesitating...

"But she delivers on time" - Adequate performance is not the bar. The question is: would you fight to keep her? If the answer is relief rather than loss at her departure, you have your answer.

Integration

This skill integrates with the Reed Hastings expert and supports talent density decision-making. Use alongside:

• talent-density-diagnostic for team-wide assessment
• 4a-feedback-delivery for the transition conversation
• freedom-responsibility-calibration to ensure adequate context was provided before assessment