3 ms·

This spreadsheet looks basically fine to me? They're taking the information they'd normally use to make decisions ("understands the tech industry" etc) and usin

• prepend 8y ago
  This spreadsheet is what I dread serving on interview panels. It has column headers that are hard to understand but gives a score to that header. Hopefully there’s a companion doc describing the criteria and the meaning between a 1-5. Without such definitions, this is just a way to ouija board bias into results because you can sum factors and sort candidates. I’ve found that people like to put more importance on numbers like this than they should and will naturally try to create cutoffs. The class column is concerning as a hiring criteria, but also that it’s just based on superficial review of info and imputing. Someone going to Wesleyan and studying abroad might be extremely poor on scholarship. Probably not, but might be. Trying to guess class by reading someone’s LinkedIn and then using that guess for something like hiring is confusing to me. That doesn’t seem like good decision making since the “data” aren’t factual. There’s a term called scientism [0] which is when something is cosmetically like science but kind of bullshit. This smells like whatever the equivalent is for data where the data are all made up bullshit, but then a reasonable looking method is applied to it. Maybe it’s “data scientism.” [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism