Careers
No open roles
right now.
We hire rarely and only senior. When we do, it is because a specific engagement needs somebody we do not have, and it is usually somebody we already know of.
Looking for project work rather than a role? That is a different conversation →
XONIK has no open roles at present. We hire rarely, only at senior level, and only when an engagement needs capability we do not have. There is no junior intake and no delivery bench, because the work is mostly judgement and judgement does not transfer to somebody who joined in week three. If you would fit, write anyway.
Why so few roles
There is no pyramid to fill.
Which is a real constraint on us, not a claim about quality.
Most consultancies grow by adding people below the ones who sold the work. That model has a permanent appetite for hiring, because leverage is where the margin comes from.
We do not run that way. The person who scopes an engagement leads it to handover, which means every hire has to be somebody who could do that on their own — and there are not many of those, and we do not need many.
So hiring here is occasional and specific. It happens when an engagement needs a capability we genuinely lack, and the candidate is usually somebody whose work we have already seen.
The honest consequence is that this page will say "no open roles" most of the time. Putting a form here and calling it a talent pipeline would be more encouraging and less true.
What this costs us, specifically: capacity. We turn down work we could do because there is nobody free, and hiring ahead of demand is not available to us in a model where every person has to be senior on arrival.
What we would look for
When a role does open.
Ten years or more, in something real
Not ten years of adjacent work. Time spent building or running systems where a wrong output had a consequence somebody answered for.
Comfortable being the only one in the room
Every engagement is led by one person. There is no partner above you reviewing the client conversation, and no team below you doing the parts you would rather not.
Able to say no to a client
A large share of the value here is telling somebody the work should not be done. That is uncomfortable and it has to be done in the room, not escalated.
Writes clearly under their own name
Everything we publish is signed. If you would not want your name on it, this is the wrong place, and we would rather find that out early.
Somewhere we can overlap
Remote by default, with an office in Bhopal for anyone near it. Timezone is negotiable; a few hours of genuine overlap with the engagement is not.
Not: someone looking for a step up
There is no rung above where you would land, and no team to grow into. If the appeal is progression, this structure has none to offer and that is not a criticism of wanting it.
Both sides
What it is, and what it is not.
What you get
- Work that is mostly judgement — deciding what should be built and who will own it, rather than building whatever was specified
- Your name on it — with the client, in the research, and in the room where the decision is made
- No timesheet culture — engagements are priced on shape, not on hours, so nobody is counting yours
- Time to publish — the research on this site is written by the people doing the work, in work time
What you do not
- A team beneath you — there is none, and adding one is not the plan
- A defined progression path — the structure is flat and stays flat
- Someone to escalate to — the difficult client conversation is yours, in the moment
- Volume — few engagements, chosen carefully. If you like being busy across twelve accounts, this will feel slow
What happens when you write
From the first email.
A real reply
From a person, saying whether there is anything now. Usually there is not, and we say that rather than going quiet.
We write back properly
About what you have actually done, in writing. No competency framework and no take-home exercise.
Work together first
Where we can, a small piece of real paid work before either side commits. It tells both of us more than any interview would.
We keep it properly
Not a database you never hear from. When something opens that fits, we write to you before we write anything public.
Most of the time the answer will be that there is nothing.
We would rather write that in a week than leave a good message unanswered for three months, which is what most firms this size actually do.
If you write and hear nothing, that is a failure on our side and worth chasing us about.
hello@xonik.com →Questions
Before you write.
Do you take juniors or graduates?
No, and not as a matter of standards. Every engagement is led by one person from scope to handover, and there is no team structure in which somebody could learn that here. A firm with a bench is a better place to start.
Do you use contractors or associates?
Yes, named specialists brought in for specific engagements. That is often how a longer relationship starts, and it is worth saying so if that is what you are after.
Where do you work from?
Remote by default, with an office in Bhopal for anyone living near it who would rather work from there. What matters is a few hours of genuine overlap with the engagement rather than a particular city.
What does the process look like?
It starts and mostly stays in writing — about work you have actually done. Where possible it moves to a small piece of real paid work before either side commits. No take-home exercises and no competency frameworks.
Should I send a CV?
Send something you built or wrote instead, with a paragraph on what you would want to work on. A CV is fine as an attachment and it is not the part we read first.
How long will you keep my details?
Until you ask us to remove them, and we will write to you when something fits rather than leaving you to check. Ask us to delete it at any point and we will confirm in writing.
Introduce yourself anyway.
There is nothing open today. If your work is the kind described above, write anyway — it is a short list and we go back to it before we go anywhere public.