5 ms·
This (like most interview processes) seems very unscientific and error prone. She doesn't mention correlation of their process to successful outcomes and until
by WhitneyLand 11y ago
This (like most interview processes) seems very unscientific and error prone.
She doesn't mention correlation of their process to successful outcomes and until you do that you're guessing.
Also doesn't mention reviewing quality of past work which I'm guessing has a better correlation if the contributions are properly vetted.
Unless you're doing A/B testing you'll never know, and are certainly screening out candidates who could have ended up being star players.
- angdis 11y agoYep, and I would go further and say that interviewing is something which has NOT been (and may never be) objectively "figured out" even though industrial psychologists have floundered for decades on how to best evaluate candidates. Interviewing is very much a people-skill.
- evanpw 11y agoHere's a meta-analysis of the empirical literature: http://mavweb.mnsu.edu/howard/Schmidt%20and%20Hunter%201998%20Validity%20and%20Utility%20Psychological%20Bulletin.pdf http://mavweb.mnsu.edu/howard/Schmidt%20and%20Hunter%201998%.... TL/DR: Give the candidate an IQ test and a work-sample test. The next best is an "integrity test", which actually measures mostly conscientiousness. You can totally ignore years of experience and education.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- e12e 11y agoWhat is an "integrity test"?
- e12e 11y agoReflecting a bit on this, and on my comment above re: CVs -- I'm inclined to just start applying to jobs with something along the lines of: I'm above average IQ[1], you can send me a work test at <email>. If the test goes ok, lets talk. Actually, in this light, codeval.com makes (even) more sense. [1] Sadly, not impressively high. I forget what score I got last time, IIRC around 130 or so. Then again, I also have pretty high "Social IQ" (self-assessed ;-), and the tests don't cover that.