5 ms·
Yes, that range looked odd to me at first glance. But your explanation made me realize that I actually use it all over the place. Except on a 1-5 scale. Startin
by klenwell 6y ago
Yes, that range looked odd to me at first glance. But your explanation made me realize that I actually use it all over the place. Except on a 1-5 scale. Starting with good enough at 3 (or 0 in this case):
1 = WTF?
2 = Needs Improvement
3 = Good Enough
4 = Better than Good Enough
5 = Almost Perfect
Daniel Kahneman recommends a scale like this for evaluating job candidates across core competencies. It's a surprisingly powerful little heuristic.
- generalizations 6y agoThe [-2,2] scale made immediate sense to me because it's zero-indexed: -2 = WTF -1 = Needs Improvement 0 = Good enough 1 = Better than Good Enough 2 = Almost Perfect It's even intuitive, since anything above zero is 'above and beyond' and anything below zero isn't good enough yet.