5 ms·
I can't pretend to know what the original test writers had in mind. However, I actually think this question serves a different purpose than to determine if you
by CapmCrackaWaka 4y ago
I can't pretend to know what the original test writers had in mind. However, I actually think this question serves a different purpose than to determine if you had actually considered stealing from an employer. These types of questions are better suited to determine if someone can walk the corporate walk and talk the corporate talk. They don't want a low level employee to go off on a customer, or make rude remarks, or otherwise say "between you and me, fuck this company lmaoooo", because that opens them up to litigation. On that front, I would say they achieved their goal.
The _obvious_ answer to this question, if you want a job, is "no". Anyone that answers "yes" is a liability, regardless of their actual intention to steal.
- idopmstuff 4y agoYeah, seems like if you're hiring for a low-level retail employee, it's not necessarily a plus if they're the kind of person who deeply analyzes this sort of question instead of giving the superficially correct response. Particularly if this was in an employer-friendly time from a hiring perspective, and they had an endless supply of candidates.
- applejacks 4y ago> they're the kind of person who deeply analyzes this sort of question Clearly they didn't deeply analyze the question in the relevant context. Answering "yes" to this is high school level "edginess". One needn't condescend, as there are equivalent questions at all levels of hiring, all with equally obvious (in)correct answers. No, you shouldn't answer "what is your biggest challenge" with "not showing up to work drunk", even if it is indeed your biggest challenge, and one that you work hard to successfully overcome every day. Another commenter refers to this as "walking the corporate walk" but I think it's more "having an understanding of context and appropriate levels of sharing" and it applies at all times in life.
- notch656c 4y agoSome cultures, and strongly correlated thus nationalities, are more brutally honest than others. So it may just be a test to see if you're an apple pie white American, which could be unlawful discrimination.
- CapmCrackaWaka 4y agoI think you have this backwards - Apparently, Americans are considered more brutally honest and direct in negotiations than other cultures: https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-negotiate-around-the-world-2015-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-negotiate-around-the-...
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y agoThat doesn't mean that Americans are more brutally honest in social interactions. In my experience, Americans commonly (admittedly, not always) avoid topics and observations which they think a listening party would find uncomfortable.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- quocanh 4y agoThis actually reminds me of something I've been thinking about lately. What we call honesty is actually two different things: truthfulness and openness. Americans are probably truthful and not open.
- yamazakiwi 4y agoIt's common in most roles for employers to check if you are flexible, teachable, and ready for cool-aid.
- NavinF 4y ago*kool-aid https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid
- alasdair_ 4y ago*Flavor Aid They didn't actually use Kool-aid in the Jonestown massacre, people just think they did.
- entropicdrifter 4y agoJust because the saying is apocryphal doesn't mean the spelling "cool-aid" was correct. The saying is "drinking the Kool-Aid" regardless
- yamazakiwi 4y agoSounds like you're drinking their cool-aid.
- NavinF 4y ago"drinking the Flavor Aid" doesn't sound nearly as good. It sounds like a knockoff
- yamazakiwi 4y agoI personally think Flavor Aid rolls right off the tongue and into the garbage.
- davidw 4y agoReminds me of the scene in Cryptonimicon, again: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1866629 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1866629
- wedn3sday 4y agoMany things remind me of scenes from the Cryptonomicon, especially things that rhyme with "torpedo."
- tejtm 4y agoSo they are filtering for a ethic that accepts boldface lying to them is necessary to cover essentials. I can not see how this paradigm could end well.
- aeturnum 4y agoI mean - all ethical systems favor boldfaced lying in some situations? Even Kant's Categorical Imperative simply says that, if you lie, you should do so in a situation where anyone in that situation should lie (i.e. hiding Jews from the Nazis, etc). Even within a Kantian framework, you could argue that in this context (a formal job application) it is moral to lie because no one believes your answer represents your most deeply held beliefs - but rather represents your willingness (and ability) to perform a role (the role of the Good Employee). If you can't be a Good Employee you should reveal it by not lying - but if you can be you can reveal it by lying on the form (which reflects the lying you will be expected to do in the job).
- int_19h 4y agoPart of the problem is that normally you're also very explicitly instructed to not lie on such forms.
- alexjurkiewicz 4y ago> ‘Isn’t learning fun? Oh, and here’s another one.’ > DO NOT FEED THE ELEPHANT. > ‘Now that,’ said Susan, ‘is good. You can’t obey it…’ > ‘… because there’s no elephant,’ said Lobsang. ‘I think I’m getting the hang of this…’ > ‘It’s an Auditor trap,’ said Susan, peering at a packing case. Terry Pratchett, Thief of Time
- aeturnum 4y agoPart of life is learning when you'll be rewarded for following the rules v.s. breaking them. Employers will sometimes ask their employees to break the law. Will you break it for them? They want you "on their side" - meaning they want you to takes risks for them. So what you are describing as a problem with the form looks like a feature to me.