4 ms·

You can eliminate all kinds of selective bias and incompetence by first filtering candidates based upon a battery of personality tests. You don't have to know

You can eliminate all kinds of selective bias and incompetence by first filtering candidates based upon a battery of personality tests. You don't have to know anything about the candidates until this pass through the initial filter.

sovietmudkipz 8y ago
What is this proposed personality filter letting through and what is it filtering out?
- midasz 8y ago
  IN: INT* OUT: anything not NT. I used to really like the MBTI-type stuff, but honestly think it's kinda nonsense now. You need a diverse team to be the best imho.
  - pessimizer 8y ago
    This is absolutely it. MBTI is garbage, but since I've always consistently tested INTJ, when they start personality-testing doors start opening.
sethammons 8y ago
Aside from personal experience, can you point to any data on this, and maybe go into some more detail? When I think of personality tests, I think of quack science. "Do you get angry a lot?", "Is it easy for you to get angry?", "Would you say it is difficult to make you angry?, and four other similar questions in a 200 question quiz. They ask the same thing multiple ways to try to know if you are an person categorizable as x, y, and/or z, and anyone sensible will put the socially desired response. An interesting take on this is CultureAmp's surveys, where they determine your working style and can rate how well you might work with different colleagues. I work great with someone I scored a 98 with. Turns out I also work great with a person I scored a 4 with. So, while fun, it seems all bunk.
- austincheney 8y ago
  I have only seen this in practice once at a little hedge fund called Bridgewater. It sounds like you are making assumptions of what you think the testing is without any frame of reference. Also, anger is an emotion opposed to a personality designation.
  - sethammons 8y ago
    ok, and? We've also seen "how many pingpong balls can fill a school bus" from the likes of Google. They eventually learned it was not a good filter. If a personality test truly is better, I want to know because I'm involved with hiring at my company. What qualifies Bridgewater's take on this? How have they leveraged it and to what effect? Correlation, causation, all that jazz too - if I want to be taller, I should obviously play basketball. [edit] you edited your response as I posted mine :) Yes, I'm assuming what a personality test is because you've given us very little to go on. Give us more. Honestly, if it is better, I'm sure others want more than "this practice is good." We want to know how, what, and why.
    - austincheney 8y ago
      > If a personality test truly is better, I want to know because I'm involved with hiring at my company. Then I recommend getting in contact with a behavioral health professional. > What qualifies Bridgewater's take on this? Their success and retention. When I went through the Bridgewater process there were about 6 different personally tests I took. Some were more precise than others. I measured a 96% objectivity score which is a statistical anomaly. I ultimately dropped out as I found a less risky position in my local metro far away from the east coast.
      - sethammons 8y ago
        There are companies with practically zero attrition rates and are successful; lots of companies can claim what you are claiming. Again, what you are saying is the same as "if I want to be taller, I should play basketball."
gvand 8y ago
Nice one, after all those sweatshops trying to interview like if they were Google (w/o any of them ever working there) the next logical step would be having random people administering "personality tests" found after a few minutes of googling or searching on wikihow ;D Competence is hard to assess without having to ask hard open technical questions. The alternative I hope you are not seriously proposing, going with gut feelings or "personality tests", is actually the epitome of surrendering to bias. Don't do it, resist.
bitwize 8y ago
Oh yeah, that's just what we need. Unicru tests for software jobs. I'm gonna go ahead and say STRONGLY DISAGREE, chumbo.
Lio 8y ago
This sounds like the old joke "avoid employing unlucky people by throwing away half the CVs you receive". What is the optimum personality type to employ for a specific role anyway? You might hire based the idea that you want people who won't "rock the boat" and just end up with a group that are shy of giving you bad news.
- bluGill 8y ago
  Most companies could save a lot of money and have similar results just by taking a random resume, verifying that the person can legally work the position and hiring them - don't even read the resume, much interview. If you cannot show your hiring process produces better than the above why are you doing it.
  - turtlecloud 8y ago
    You are a visionary beyond our times.
paulie_a 8y ago
Personality tests are probably one of the worst ways to filter. It is actually a signal the company has no idea what they are doing and more than likely has terrible management.

sovietmudkipz 8y ago

What is this proposed personality filter letting through and what is it filtering out?

midasz 8y ago
IN: INT* OUT: anything not NT. I used to really like the MBTI-type stuff, but honestly think it's kinda nonsense now. You need a diverse team to be the best imho.
- pessimizer 8y ago
  This is absolutely it. MBTI is garbage, but since I've always consistently tested INTJ, when they start personality-testing doors start opening.

sethammons 8y ago

Aside from personal experience, can you point to any data on this, and maybe go into some more detail? When I think of personality tests, I think of quack science. "Do you get angry a lot?", "Is it easy for you to get angry?", "Would you say it is difficult to make you angry?, and four other similar questions in a 200 question quiz. They ask the same thing multiple ways to try to know if you are an person categorizable as x, y, and/or z, and anyone sensible will put the socially desired response. An interesting take on this is CultureAmp's surveys, where they determine your working style and can rate how well you might work with different colleagues. I work great with someone I scored a 98 with. Turns out I also work great with a person I scored a 4 with. So, while fun, it seems all bunk.

austincheney 8y ago
I have only seen this in practice once at a little hedge fund called Bridgewater. It sounds like you are making assumptions of what you think the testing is without any frame of reference. Also, anger is an emotion opposed to a personality designation.
- sethammons 8y ago
  ok, and? We've also seen "how many pingpong balls can fill a school bus" from the likes of Google. They eventually learned it was not a good filter. If a personality test truly is better, I want to know because I'm involved with hiring at my company. What qualifies Bridgewater's take on this? How have they leveraged it and to what effect? Correlation, causation, all that jazz too - if I want to be taller, I should obviously play basketball. [edit] you edited your response as I posted mine :) Yes, I'm assuming what a personality test is because you've given us very little to go on. Give us more. Honestly, if it is better, I'm sure others want more than "this practice is good." We want to know how, what, and why.
  - austincheney 8y ago
    > If a personality test truly is better, I want to know because I'm involved with hiring at my company. Then I recommend getting in contact with a behavioral health professional. > What qualifies Bridgewater's take on this? Their success and retention. When I went through the Bridgewater process there were about 6 different personally tests I took. Some were more precise than others. I measured a 96% objectivity score which is a statistical anomaly. I ultimately dropped out as I found a less risky position in my local metro far away from the east coast.
    - sethammons 8y ago
      There are companies with practically zero attrition rates and are successful; lots of companies can claim what you are claiming. Again, what you are saying is the same as "if I want to be taller, I should play basketball."

gvand 8y ago

Nice one, after all those sweatshops trying to interview like if they were Google (w/o any of them ever working there) the next logical step would be having random people administering "personality tests" found after a few minutes of googling or searching on wikihow ;D Competence is hard to assess without having to ask hard open technical questions. The alternative I hope you are not seriously proposing, going with gut feelings or "personality tests", is actually the epitome of surrendering to bias. Don't do it, resist.

bitwize 8y ago

Oh yeah, that's just what we need. Unicru tests for software jobs. I'm gonna go ahead and say STRONGLY DISAGREE, chumbo.

Lio 8y ago

This sounds like the old joke "avoid employing unlucky people by throwing away half the CVs you receive". What is the optimum personality type to employ for a specific role anyway? You might hire based the idea that you want people who won't "rock the boat" and just end up with a group that are shy of giving you bad news.

bluGill 8y ago
Most companies could save a lot of money and have similar results just by taking a random resume, verifying that the person can legally work the position and hiring them - don't even read the resume, much interview. If you cannot show your hiring process produces better than the above why are you doing it.
- turtlecloud 8y ago
  You are a visionary beyond our times.

paulie_a 8y ago

Personality tests are probably one of the worst ways to filter. It is actually a signal the company has no idea what they are doing and more than likely has terrible management.