5 ms·

DEI questions is a good way to select people that can lie with a straight face. Not disclosing your cards is a valuable skill for managers and to some line empl

DEI questions is a good way to select people that can lie with a straight face. Not disclosing your cards is a valuable skill for managers and to some line employees. Weak candidates bluntly speak their mind and tell more than you ask for. Average candidates conceal their true podition in a cringy way. Strong candidates can smooth talk on the plain speech level and crack impolite jokes in such a way that only few would understand.

siquick 6y ago
No wonder so many workplaces are full of politickers and toxicity if these are the kind of signals that are being looked for in interviews.
Centigonal 6y ago
Didn't know Robert Mercer browsed HN
diebeforei485 6y ago
Agreed; people should learn to play the game.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
wytemail 6y ago
> Average candidates conceal their true podition in a cringy way. Ironic
lr4444lr 6y ago
I agree with you on the weaker / avg. responses this question, but you have no way of distinguishing a polished BSer you want from the sincere fanatic on these topics who will be absolutely toxic to your org.
treis 6y ago
Isn't that what all of these "Tell me about a time when..." questions select for? They're just a filter for people that can come up with a convincing lie on the spot. Or those that have prepared a set of lies for questions that the interviewer asked. For example on the disagreement question they have this as a red flag: >Resolution through avoidance Sorry, but this is how the world works. Maybe there's some idyllic companies out there full of reasonable people working through disagreements, but it's definitely not most. Most of them will punish you for openly disagreeing with them. Avoidance is an appropriate strategy in that situation.
- mandeepj 6y ago
  >Resolution through avoidance Then there's no resolution. Are you saying avoid talking about the conflict? Not sure how can you can resolve a situation with that.
  - frongpik 6y ago
    You just don't resolve it. Most conflicts are about unimportant things and resolving a conflict usually burns some social capital, because someone will be proven wrong, etc.

siquick 6y ago

No wonder so many workplaces are full of politickers and toxicity if these are the kind of signals that are being looked for in interviews.

Centigonal 6y ago

Didn't know Robert Mercer browsed HN

diebeforei485 6y ago

Agreed; people should learn to play the game.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

wytemail 6y ago

> Average candidates conceal their true podition in a cringy way. Ironic

lr4444lr 6y ago

I agree with you on the weaker / avg. responses this question, but you have no way of distinguishing a polished BSer you want from the sincere fanatic on these topics who will be absolutely toxic to your org.

treis 6y ago

Isn't that what all of these "Tell me about a time when..." questions select for? They're just a filter for people that can come up with a convincing lie on the spot. Or those that have prepared a set of lies for questions that the interviewer asked. For example on the disagreement question they have this as a red flag: >Resolution through avoidance Sorry, but this is how the world works. Maybe there's some idyllic companies out there full of reasonable people working through disagreements, but it's definitely not most. Most of them will punish you for openly disagreeing with them. Avoidance is an appropriate strategy in that situation.

mandeepj 6y ago
>Resolution through avoidance Then there's no resolution. Are you saying avoid talking about the conflict? Not sure how can you can resolve a situation with that.
- frongpik 6y ago
  You just don't resolve it. Most conflicts are about unimportant things and resolving a conflict usually burns some social capital, because someone will be proven wrong, etc.