About us

We stand between a person
and a job they want.

ApplicantSpace is a product of Next Chapter Skills Private Limited, an AI product studio in Bangalore. We write software that helps someone apply for work — and, since last year, software that scores them for the institution placing them. The second thing is why this page reads the way it does.

Next ChapterNext Chapter Skills Private LimitedOwner and operator of ApplicantSpace · Bangalore, India · est. 2025
2025
founded
Next Chapter Skills Private Limited — the company that owns ApplicantSpace
11
people
One room in Bangalore, mostly remote
2
kinds of customer
People looking for work, and the institutions placing them
0
employers pay us to rank anyone
No sponsored placements, ever
The uncomfortable part

Two customers. One of them
is being judged.

A candidate wants a coach. A placement cell wants a ranking. We sell to both, and the same model produces both. Pretending there is no tension in that would be the first dishonest thing we did.

When a candidate is on the screen
It feels like
A coach who is on your side, and says so in the second person.
A score is
Formative — a gap you can close before Thursday.
We never
Gatekeep, judge or shame. No leaderboard, no rank against your classmates.
When a reviewer is on the screen
It feels like
An evidence pack a reviewer can defend to the candidate.
A score is
Comparative — a ranking to read, with the transcript one click away.
We never
Auto-decide anything about a person. The product cannot, not just does not.

Where the two disagree, the candidate wins. That is easy to write on a page, so we made it a set of things that are missing from the product on purpose.

Five things we will not build

Promises are cheap.
Missing buttons are not.

Each of these is a decision someone on the team has to re-argue every time a customer asks for the convenient version. So far we have said no every time. The mechanism is written next to the promise so you can check whether we kept it.

01
No score decides anything about a person.
HowThere is no automatic advance and no automatic decline. A reviewer clicks Advance, Hold or Decline on every single row, or nothing happens to that candidate. A line saying so is fixed to the bottom of the shortlist and cannot be dismissed.
02
The harmful action is slower than the helpful one.
HowBulk advance exists. Bulk decline does not — not greyed out, not behind a confirm dialog. Absent. Declining someone is one candidate, one reviewer, one click at a time.
03
A camera is off until an institution turns it on and tells you first.
HowCamera and screenshare are two separate settings an admin must switch on, each one appears in the consent screen in plain language before anything records, and every screening has an unscored practice run.
04
We do not invent a fact about you.
HowIf your evidence does not support a claim, the resume leaves the gap in and the interview brief marks it with a warning. You will never have to defend a sentence you did not say.
05
A score that is unsure says so, loudly.
HowA wide confidence band renders as a warning that asks the reviewer to go read the transcript. We would rather look uncertain than be quietly wrong about someone.
How we are measured

The numbers we publish are
the ones that could hurt us.

Anyone can report accuracy. These are the four figures an unhappy candidate, a placement head or a regulator would actually ask for, so they live in public rather than in a sales deck.

± 4 pts
how much a score moves
The same answer re-scored three times. We publish the band on every rubric an institution builds, and refuse to ship one that will not settle.
rubric v3
what produced the number
Version stamped on every scorecard, with the model version and the timestamp. Old scores keep the rubric they were scored under.
100%
decisions made by a person
892 completed screenings last quarter. 892 named humans clicked the decision. There is no other code path.
17 → 4
challenges, and changes
Seventeen candidates asked for a human re-review. Four scores changed, three of them upward. We would rather print that than not know it.
Where this came from

Two years, and one week
that changed the rules.

2024 · Q2
A resume tailor, like everyone else
Two of us, one weekend, a script that rewrote a resume against a job description. It was useful and completely undifferentiated.
2025 · Q1
The extension
People kept pasting job descriptions into us. Reading the posting where they found it turned out to be the whole product.
2025 · Q3
It stopped waiting to be asked
The overnight run and the Today queue. The product became a colleague who had done some reading, rather than a tool you remembered to open.
2026 · Q1
We shipped an auto-shortlist. Then we removed it.
A placement cell asked for a cut-off that declined below a score. We built it. Three weeks later a student asked why she had been dropped and nobody in the room — us or them — could answer her in a sentence. We took it out and refunded the quarter. Everything above on this page dates from that week.
2026 · Q3
Live mock interviews and evidence packs
Speech to speech, scored against a rubric the institution calibrates, with a transcript anyone can be shown.
Who is accountable

Two names, in case
you need one.

"The team" cannot be held to anything. If one of the commitments above is broken, one of these two people is the person who let it happen.

SB
Satya Behara
Product & Technology
Answers for the product, the model and the audit trail. Signs off every scoring change.
PK
Pavan Kolli
Business owner, Next Chapter Skills Private Limited
Answers to institutional partners, and to a candidate who has a problem with the product.
If a score affected you

Three ways to argue with us.

You should not have to find these. They are on the about page because this is where people end up when something has gone wrong and they want to know who they are dealing with.

Ask for a human re-review
Open the evidence pack for any completed screening and use Request human re-review. A person reads your full transcript against the rubric.
Answered in 5 working days
Get your data, or delete it
Settings › Privacy, or write to privacy@applicantspace.com. Deletion takes the recordings and the transcripts with it, not just the account.
Completed within 30 days
Talk to a person, not a form
A named human replies. If you are a student and your institution is the one you have a problem with, say so and we will not route it through them.
First reply in 1 working day

Scores rank candidates for a reviewer to read. They do not decide anything. No candidate advances or is declined without a person clicking. That sentence is fixed to the bottom of our reviewer product, and it is the sentence to hold us to.

Contact usRead the privacy policy