4 ms·
> that would really only be a big competitive advantage if great people who don't interview well were more numerous than those who interview at least adequately
by bradlys 6y ago
> that would really only be a big competitive advantage if great people who don't interview well were more numerous than those who interview at least adequately, or if those great people were greater than the great people who do interview adequately.
It sounds like you're making it a zero sum game. Isn't it reasonable to assume that you could create an interview process that does well for both parties rather than one that is exclusionary? Isn't the issue with the current interviewing practices is that it is exclusionary and doesn't assess people correctly?
- bryanrasmussen 6y agoI guess, maybe it's possible, but as I have not have not had any eureka moment recently leading me to pursue a method for doing it, and have not read anything where someone had a moment that sounded to me like "hey that might work!" I am prone to cynicism - one of my failings. If every variation of interviewing people try seems to lead to a sub-optimal zero-sum game I worry that interviewing is zero-sum and what one should try to do is to work the optimization angle. but like I said - cynic.