4 ms·

I appreciate your response. I don't agree with all of it (I'm in the 'life ain't fair' camp) but certainly there are people whose latent ability is there but ca

I appreciate your response. I don't agree with all of it (I'm in the 'life ain't fair' camp) but certainly there are people whose latent ability is there but can't be utilized due to one reason or the other. The thing is though, that there's no way a company can correct for that. Let's take addiction as an example. A company most definitely should not be hiring addicts. Getting work done is difficult in the best of situations but having drug addicts as co-workers would make it impossible to succeed. Managing even mentally healthy individuals is a great challenge. I think you're expecting too much from organizations and managers as individuals if you can think they can repair drug addicts, people with mental illness...

komali2 7y ago
Fair. I don't expect companies to manage drug addicts. But what about ex-drug-addicts? Or convicted felons that have served their time? The government "fixes" the problem and them drops them into society and says "good luck!" (well, it actually doesn't, but for the sake of argument) I'm saying in cases like this, these people can offer valuable insight due to their circumstances. Perhaps valuable enough to spend a couple extra months on upskilling an ex-felon on, I dunno, product design. You do it, then they turn around and create an educational product for inmates that you can sell to a state penitentiary system for millions, which you do for all 50 states. A silly example, but do you see my point? I think we've gone way into the weeds here and I'm confusing myself at this point, but I appreciate the dialogue.
- malvosenior 7y ago
  I actually practice this more than my argument probably leads on. Coming from an unorthodox background means that I don't really evaluate potential hires based on their school, upbringing... I look solely at ability to do the job. I don't have the liberty of gambling on unqualified people though. I personally would hire an ex-felon if they could demonstrate the ability to code at the level required for a position. That's a pretty personal choice though and I wouldn't fault someone for not being comfortable doing that. What I won't do is hire someone who's unqualified. I've seen (and passed on) plenty of unqualified people with degrees from high end schools so this cuts both ways.

komali2 7y ago

Fair. I don't expect companies to manage drug addicts. But what about ex-drug-addicts? Or convicted felons that have served their time? The government "fixes" the problem and them drops them into society and says "good luck!" (well, it actually doesn't, but for the sake of argument) I'm saying in cases like this, these people can offer valuable insight due to their circumstances. Perhaps valuable enough to spend a couple extra months on upskilling an ex-felon on, I dunno, product design. You do it, then they turn around and create an educational product for inmates that you can sell to a state penitentiary system for millions, which you do for all 50 states. A silly example, but do you see my point? I think we've gone way into the weeds here and I'm confusing myself at this point, but I appreciate the dialogue.

malvosenior 7y ago
I actually practice this more than my argument probably leads on. Coming from an unorthodox background means that I don't really evaluate potential hires based on their school, upbringing... I look solely at ability to do the job. I don't have the liberty of gambling on unqualified people though. I personally would hire an ex-felon if they could demonstrate the ability to code at the level required for a position. That's a pretty personal choice though and I wouldn't fault someone for not being comfortable doing that. What I won't do is hire someone who's unqualified. I've seen (and passed on) plenty of unqualified people with degrees from high end schools so this cuts both ways.