5 ms·

However, he was less comfortable jumping into [and] thinking about a problem outside of an area of expertise. These kinds of snap judgements I find very proble

However, he was less comfortable jumping into [and] thinking about a problem outside of an area of expertise. These kinds of snap judgements I find very problematic. As if anyone -- even if they're an "industry leader", even if they've interviewed hundreds of candidates; heck, even if they're a truly towering figure in their field (or otherwise a truly brilliant person that no one knows about yet) -- can make that kind of an assessment from a (highly contrived and stressful) 45-minute or so interaction with someone. Maybe after working alongside someone for several months, you could say that. But from their off-the-cuff answers to your made up puzzle problems (or even from unstructured conversation)? I just don't buy it. BTW you should be doing a lot more to anonymize these profiles. Blurring the school name is a good start, but you definitely should not include company names either; and the gender should be obscured, as well. Even from just a small tuple of attributes like these, it wouldn't be too hard to identify, and perhaps cause considerable harm to some of these candidates.

jy1 9y ago
I don't think it's a "snap judgement". Interviewing is a trying to get as much signal in a short window. Any good interviewer knows there is high variance, however you still need to make an assessment quickly.
- lgas 9y ago
  It kind of sounds like you said: "I don't think it's a snap judgement. Interviewing is [making snap judgements]. Any good interviewer knows there is high variance, however you still need to make [a snap judgement]."
  - jy1 9y ago
    Apologies, to clarify: "These kinds of snap judgements I find very problematic. As if anyone... can make that kind of an assessment from a (highly contrived and stressful) 45-minute or so interaction with someone." "snap judgement" in my reading, implies a rashness, lack of carelessness, or impulsiveness, (or arrogance, which is implied by OP) My counter is that although it is not a lot of evidence, it is generally a very deliberate act.
    - kafkaesq 9y ago
      My counter is that although it is not a lot of evidence, it is generally a very deliberate act. Is not "lacking in evidence, yet deliberate" the very definition of... rash and impulsive? BTW I wouldn't say these people are arrogant (for making these kinds of judgements), per se. But it does seem that they're biting off more than they can realistically chew.

jy1 9y ago

I don't think it's a "snap judgement". Interviewing is a trying to get as much signal in a short window. Any good interviewer knows there is high variance, however you still need to make an assessment quickly.

lgas 9y ago
It kind of sounds like you said: "I don't think it's a snap judgement. Interviewing is [making snap judgements]. Any good interviewer knows there is high variance, however you still need to make [a snap judgement]."
- jy1 9y ago
  Apologies, to clarify: "These kinds of snap judgements I find very problematic. As if anyone... can make that kind of an assessment from a (highly contrived and stressful) 45-minute or so interaction with someone." "snap judgement" in my reading, implies a rashness, lack of carelessness, or impulsiveness, (or arrogance, which is implied by OP) My counter is that although it is not a lot of evidence, it is generally a very deliberate act.
  - kafkaesq 9y ago
    My counter is that although it is not a lot of evidence, it is generally a very deliberate act. Is not "lacking in evidence, yet deliberate" the very definition of... rash and impulsive? BTW I wouldn't say these people are arrogant (for making these kinds of judgements), per se. But it does seem that they're biting off more than they can realistically chew.