5 ms·

Assume that everything he says is right. When Google, the data analytics company, openly admits that there is no correlation between interviewing and job perfo

Assume that everything he says is right. When Google, the data analytics company, openly admits that there is no correlation between interviewing and job performance, how do you identify that tiny fraction of amazing talent you want to let in?

cheez 8y ago
Where did Google say this?
- sjg007 8y ago
  In an interview with the New York Time by their chief of HR at the time: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-big-data-may-not-be-such-a-big-deal.html?_r=1& https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-...
  - cheez 8y ago
    Just glanced, but does not seem to support the earlier assertion. Just that brain teasers aren't that useful.
    - eindiran 8y ago
      Brain teasers are only mentioned at the very end of the interview. The whole beginning section discusses (and supports) GP's earlier assertion.
- eindiran 8y ago
  "Years ago, we did a study to determine whether anyone at Google is particularly good at hiring. We looked at tens of thousands of interviews, and everyone who had done the interviews and what they scored the candidate, and how that person ultimately performed in their job. We found zero relationship. It’s a complete random mess, except for one guy who was highly predictive because he only interviewed people for a very specialized area, where he happened to be the world’s leading expert." From the third paragraph of the first answer here: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-big-data-may-not-be-such-a-big-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-...
  - cheez 8y ago
    Ah. My glancing-fu is not strong. Thank you.
- hooloovoo_zoo 8y ago
  They said that given you are hired, there is no correlation between job performance and your interview score, not that there is no correlation between someone's interview score and how that person will perform. It's analogous to saying people who scored 1600 on their SAT perform no better than those who scored 1500, not that SAT scores are unrelated to performance.
  - dilyevsky 8y ago
    Thanks, i really can’t believe this had to be spelled out. Btw what they did find correlating with job performance was candidate’s GPA =)
    - cheez 8y ago
      Only if they recently graduated.
jghn 8y ago
Schmidt & Hunter (1998) "The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology" was a metaanalysis of hiring across many fields and wound up noting that the only metric with any positive signal was if one measured General Mental Ability and work samples from prior work. And even then the signal wasn't great
dilyevsky 8y ago
> Google, the data analytics company, openly admits that there is no correlation between interviewing and job performance Google never said this. It would be pretty dumb thing to say because otherwise they could save $$$ by just rolling the dice on application.

cheez 8y ago

Where did Google say this?

sjg007 8y ago
In an interview with the New York Time by their chief of HR at the time: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-big-data-may-not-be-such-a-big-deal.html?_r=1& https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-...
- cheez 8y ago
  Just glanced, but does not seem to support the earlier assertion. Just that brain teasers aren't that useful.
  - eindiran 8y ago
    Brain teasers are only mentioned at the very end of the interview. The whole beginning section discusses (and supports) GP's earlier assertion.
eindiran 8y ago
"Years ago, we did a study to determine whether anyone at Google is particularly good at hiring. We looked at tens of thousands of interviews, and everyone who had done the interviews and what they scored the candidate, and how that person ultimately performed in their job. We found zero relationship. It’s a complete random mess, except for one guy who was highly predictive because he only interviewed people for a very specialized area, where he happened to be the world’s leading expert." From the third paragraph of the first answer here: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-big-data-may-not-be-such-a-big-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/business/in-head-hunting-...
- cheez 8y ago
  Ah. My glancing-fu is not strong. Thank you.
hooloovoo_zoo 8y ago
They said that given you are hired, there is no correlation between job performance and your interview score, not that there is no correlation between someone's interview score and how that person will perform. It's analogous to saying people who scored 1600 on their SAT perform no better than those who scored 1500, not that SAT scores are unrelated to performance.
- dilyevsky 8y ago
  Thanks, i really can’t believe this had to be spelled out. Btw what they did find correlating with job performance was candidate’s GPA =)
  - cheez 8y ago
    Only if they recently graduated.

jghn 8y ago

Schmidt & Hunter (1998) "The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology" was a metaanalysis of hiring across many fields and wound up noting that the only metric with any positive signal was if one measured General Mental Ability and work samples from prior work. And even then the signal wasn't great

dilyevsky 8y ago

> Google, the data analytics company, openly admits that there is no correlation between interviewing and job performance Google never said this. It would be pretty dumb thing to say because otherwise they could save $$$ by just rolling the dice on application.