5 ms·

That's a ridiculous comparison. Time pressure is directly tied to performance. Sometimes, stuff breaks and wouldn't it be great if it got fixed in half an hou

by dolni 5y ago

That's a ridiculous comparison. Time pressure is directly tied to performance. Sometimes, stuff breaks and wouldn't it be great if it got fixed in half an hour instead of four hours? Projects sometimes have deadlines. You are not talking about an accommodation made for something unrelated to the job, here. This is some gold-level mental gymnastics.

adolph 5y ago
Well, internal deadlines can be adjusted and accommodations can be requested for external deadlines, right? It would be kinda unfair if one's own workplace had to absorb any negative externalities of one's accommodations. That doesn't make sense. Customers aren't immune to the ADA.
Retric 5y ago
Deadlines across hours or days are very different than deadlines across minutes. Many strategies like going for a walk can help you solve difficult problems, but that’s not an option on a 1 minute per question interview. Which means tight interview deadlines artificially constrain your applicant pool, forcing you to pay higher wages. Beyond legal requirements, that’s why it’s a good idea to only care about what matters for the actual job.
- dolni 5y ago
  > that’s not an option on a 1 minute per question interview. Why do you assume that all interviews are structured that way? They aren't. I have interviewed with Google and that was not how most of my interview process was conducted.
  - Retric 5y ago
    It doesn’t matter the percentage of time devoted to short term problem solving. If it’s a requirement for applicants to go through that process successfully then it’s a requirement to get the job. The core argument is really simple. Ideal teams don’t consist of 10 identical clones of the ideal worker allowing the team to work 10x as fast. They consist of multiple different skills that allow teams to finish complex tasks more than 10x as efficiently as any one person on the team could. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
bawolff 5y ago
> Sometimes, stuff breaks and wouldn't it be great if it got fixed in half an hour instead of four hours? If that's happening constantly, you should find a new job. That's a major red flag. Incidents should be rare at any well run org. Sure sometimes incidents happen and someone has to deal with them. At most companies that is a pretty rare occurance (unless you're on some incident team). When it does happen, different team members have different skills dealing with them - and that's ok for a rare part of the job. Additionally, for longer incidents, often the person with a slow ramp up but better understanding is more useful than the person who jumps right in without understanding. A sure way to make things worse is to panic and try to fix things without understanding what happened well enough. (Speaking as someone who has been involved in incident response in various jobs)

by dolni 5y ago

adolph 5y ago

Well, internal deadlines can be adjusted and accommodations can be requested for external deadlines, right? It would be kinda unfair if one's own workplace had to absorb any negative externalities of one's accommodations. That doesn't make sense. Customers aren't immune to the ADA.

Retric 5y ago

Deadlines across hours or days are very different than deadlines across minutes. Many strategies like going for a walk can help you solve difficult problems, but that’s not an option on a 1 minute per question interview. Which means tight interview deadlines artificially constrain your applicant pool, forcing you to pay higher wages. Beyond legal requirements, that’s why it’s a good idea to only care about what matters for the actual job.

dolni 5y ago
> that’s not an option on a 1 minute per question interview. Why do you assume that all interviews are structured that way? They aren't. I have interviewed with Google and that was not how most of my interview process was conducted.
- Retric 5y ago
  It doesn’t matter the percentage of time devoted to short term problem solving. If it’s a requirement for applicants to go through that process successfully then it’s a requirement to get the job. The core argument is really simple. Ideal teams don’t consist of 10 identical clones of the ideal worker allowing the team to work 10x as fast. They consist of multiple different skills that allow teams to finish complex tasks more than 10x as efficiently as any one person on the team could. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

bawolff 5y ago

> Sometimes, stuff breaks and wouldn't it be great if it got fixed in half an hour instead of four hours? If that's happening constantly, you should find a new job. That's a major red flag. Incidents should be rare at any well run org. Sure sometimes incidents happen and someone has to deal with them. At most companies that is a pretty rare occurance (unless you're on some incident team). When it does happen, different team members have different skills dealing with them - and that's ok for a rare part of the job. Additionally, for longer incidents, often the person with a slow ramp up but better understanding is more useful than the person who jumps right in without understanding. A sure way to make things worse is to panic and try to fix things without understanding what happened well enough. (Speaking as someone who has been involved in incident response in various jobs)