3 ms·

>> I wonder if anyone stopped at any point to question whether that’s the ideal type of hire. > I think this is the most telling bit. Time after time If I can

>> I wonder if anyone stopped at any point to question whether that’s the ideal type of hire. > I think this is the most telling bit. Time after time If I can rephrase the question as, does anybody check if the rating somebody receives in an interview is positively correlated with their performance rating in subsequent years? The answer is yes people do analysis of that question and yes it is.

the_af 4y ago
> The answer is yes people do analysis of that question and yes it is. I'm not sure. The author answered this question with a "no". They admitted they don't analyze or check how actual performance on the job correlates with doing well on this kind of interview questions. Maybe others do, but the author doesn't. I wonder if anyone at Google checks this.
- lesuorac 4y ago
  You can wonder as long as you want but I've told you the answer ... In general, even people internal don't bother to use moma to check this so your opinion is not alone.
  - the_af 4y ago
    I see, you mean "someone at Google, just not the author"? Because the author explicitly said he doesn't do follow ups and so he doesn't know if his question is a good predictor of actual performance. Maybe someone else at Google does the follow up, is this what you mean? Strange that the author doesn't mention this though.
    - lesuorac 4y ago
      > I see, you mean "someone at Google, just not the author" Correct. > Because the author explicitly said he doesn't do follow ups and so he doesn't know if his question is a good predictor of actual performance. This would be difficult as a random engineer. People Ops has different access to performance/interview data so they can do this analysis; your interviewer can't (unless you share your future ratings with them and they wrote down all of the ratings). You can do the analysis on yourself though but you'll have to jump through some hoops to get your own interview data. It's also a single data point so unless you can convince a bunch of other people to also do this it really isn't significant. > Strange that the author doesn't mention this though. I'll be honest, I think maybe 1k employees know that anybody has bothered to do this analysis. It would not surprise me that the author is completely unaware given most of memegen is as well.
grumple 4y ago
How could they perform this analysis? Does every engineer at Google excel? Is their revenue a permanent hockey stick? If so, the process is working. If not, it's not. But if they have any poor engineers, their process clearly doesn't work so conclusively. Because those engineers passed their process. And they have no control group, unless they've secretly been hiring a group of engineers without asking them these sort of questions (or ignored the results for a group). I just don't see how Google could determine the process works without studying what happens if they don't do it.

the_af 4y ago

> The answer is yes people do analysis of that question and yes it is. I'm not sure. The author answered this question with a "no". They admitted they don't analyze or check how actual performance on the job correlates with doing well on this kind of interview questions. Maybe others do, but the author doesn't. I wonder if anyone at Google checks this.

lesuorac 4y ago
You can wonder as long as you want but I've told you the answer ... In general, even people internal don't bother to use moma to check this so your opinion is not alone.
- the_af 4y ago
  I see, you mean "someone at Google, just not the author"? Because the author explicitly said he doesn't do follow ups and so he doesn't know if his question is a good predictor of actual performance. Maybe someone else at Google does the follow up, is this what you mean? Strange that the author doesn't mention this though.
  - lesuorac 4y ago
    > I see, you mean "someone at Google, just not the author" Correct. > Because the author explicitly said he doesn't do follow ups and so he doesn't know if his question is a good predictor of actual performance. This would be difficult as a random engineer. People Ops has different access to performance/interview data so they can do this analysis; your interviewer can't (unless you share your future ratings with them and they wrote down all of the ratings). You can do the analysis on yourself though but you'll have to jump through some hoops to get your own interview data. It's also a single data point so unless you can convince a bunch of other people to also do this it really isn't significant. > Strange that the author doesn't mention this though. I'll be honest, I think maybe 1k employees know that anybody has bothered to do this analysis. It would not surprise me that the author is completely unaware given most of memegen is as well.

grumple 4y ago

How could they perform this analysis? Does every engineer at Google excel? Is their revenue a permanent hockey stick? If so, the process is working. If not, it's not. But if they have any poor engineers, their process clearly doesn't work so conclusively. Because those engineers passed their process. And they have no control group, unless they've secretly been hiring a group of engineers without asking them these sort of questions (or ignored the results for a group). I just don't see how Google could determine the process works without studying what happens if they don't do it.