4 ms·

> The gatekeepers are there for a reason. Self-Limiting thinking. Unless you're a rules, systems, and process guy. This is a real life Kobayashi Maru test.

keenmaster 7y ago
“This is a real life Kobayashi Maru test.” Do you know empirically that that’s the ideal way to screen candidates? Because that would be the only good reason for so many companies to hire in that manner. There are many great engineers who, precisely because of the traits that make them great, would “fail” that Kobayashi Maru test and settle for a suboptimal role. Not only do they lose out on experience befitting of their aptitude, but the company loses out on the best candidate, and the economy loses out on the surplus created by ideal labor matching.
- JSeymourATL 7y ago
  > ideal labor matching. The system is NOT designed for ideal labor matching. Not unlike the Test. The job-seeker (applicant) and Employer are working at cross-purposes. Incidentally, many Hiring Executives understand this problem. And are often open to dialoguing with people trying to circumvent the HR black hole. Manage or Be Managed is the proposition. Either hunt for work (people you can help) or passively hope someone will notice you.
  - keenmaster 7y ago
    The job search process, as it stands, is another high entropy game in a life full of games. Many companies have reached the heights of success by reducing or eliminating one of those games. Ebay is one example - it takes out all the posturing and dumb games involved in selling an illiquid item. As a result of Ebay, many more of those items are sold, for higher prices, more quickly, and to the people that ascribe the highest value to them. Sure, the job search "game" cannot be completely eliminated. There will always be some fuzziness. However, the fuzziness can be greatly reduced on both sides, and that would be immensely valuable. You have way more faith in the value of the current job search game than I do.

keenmaster 7y ago

“This is a real life Kobayashi Maru test.” Do you know empirically that that’s the ideal way to screen candidates? Because that would be the only good reason for so many companies to hire in that manner. There are many great engineers who, precisely because of the traits that make them great, would “fail” that Kobayashi Maru test and settle for a suboptimal role. Not only do they lose out on experience befitting of their aptitude, but the company loses out on the best candidate, and the economy loses out on the surplus created by ideal labor matching.

JSeymourATL 7y ago
> ideal labor matching. The system is NOT designed for ideal labor matching. Not unlike the Test. The job-seeker (applicant) and Employer are working at cross-purposes. Incidentally, many Hiring Executives understand this problem. And are often open to dialoguing with people trying to circumvent the HR black hole. Manage or Be Managed is the proposition. Either hunt for work (people you can help) or passively hope someone will notice you.
- keenmaster 7y ago
  The job search process, as it stands, is another high entropy game in a life full of games. Many companies have reached the heights of success by reducing or eliminating one of those games. Ebay is one example - it takes out all the posturing and dumb games involved in selling an illiquid item. As a result of Ebay, many more of those items are sold, for higher prices, more quickly, and to the people that ascribe the highest value to them. Sure, the job search "game" cannot be completely eliminated. There will always be some fuzziness. However, the fuzziness can be greatly reduced on both sides, and that would be immensely valuable. You have way more faith in the value of the current job search game than I do.