7 ms·

> It's a good predictor, because people who actually did good in school and finished their homeworks have a good work ethic. Wow, you actually ask for their tr

> It's a good predictor, because people who actually did good in school and finished their homeworks have a good work ethic. Wow, you actually ask for their transcript? I don't think I've run across this after my first job (an internship), thank god. The main issue with this, of course, is that people are generally much more motivated by pay than by grades and foisted requirements, so you're going to get a very noisy signal from this.

michaelrpeskin 3y ago
I’d rather have people who are internally motivated to do good work. I don’t look for people who get good grades for the sake of getting good grades. But people who have good grades as a byproduct of just wanting to do well. I think it’s a pretty good signal for me.
- DinaCoder99 3y ago
  > I don’t look for people who get good grades for the sake of getting good grades. But people who have good grades as a byproduct of just wanting to do well. What is the distinction? Surely a "internally motivated" person would be driven to learn regardless of grades. Anyway, I'm fairly certain nobody will ever work for you out of simply "internal motivation".
  - michaelrpeskin 3y ago
    I'll use an example outside my field. I have a friend who's a mechanical engineer. He's smart and pretty talented, and is a real hard worker. But the reason he's a mechanical engineer is that he wasn't good at theoretical physics and by going "down" a step, he was able to apply all the physics ideas to mechanical engineering. So he was able to do well in the field. But it's not what he "does for fun". There are also people at his small company who spend every weekend building race cars just for fun. They have barns full of engines and tools (I'm jealous of how much space they can afford out in the rural areas!). The reason that they are such good engineers is that they find it fun. They do it in their spare time for fun. They find solving these kind of problems fun. So when they go to work during the week, they're having fun which makes them really good at what they do. My friend said it to me before that "you can't beat someone who does it for fun" and that's just about for everything. If you look at the best hedge fund managers, sure they had more money than I did to get started. But they also find it fun to do (what I think is) the drudgery of learning the space that they're working in. So back to grades...if you find someone with good grades who sounds like they worked for the good grades, that's fine, they're a hard worker and you probably won't go wrong with them. But if you find someone with good grades who just was having fun solving problems and happened to get good grades, then you have a real winner. And I think you need to just talk to people and see what they say. You can tell the "grinds" from the others. I'm also careful to keep in mind that lots of it is luck: having interest (finding it fun), talent (also being good at it), and value (someone willing to pay for it) doesn't make you a better person, it just makes you good at the one thing that someone wants. For example, the things that I find fun are related so solving certain kinds of mathematical problems with software. I was able to find a company that needs that, but there are very small number of places that need what I love. If I had to work for Big Software Co, I'd be ok at it, but wouldn't be a 10x developer. I guess I'm just saying that luck plays a lot into it.
- paulcole 3y ago
  How do you tell the difference? People who excel academically (in my experience) often have a rough transition to the working world because the feedback loop is so different from what they’ve trained themselves to be successful at. They go from 9 weeks of studying to being declared excellent and moving on to something else and repeating the process to a lot more ambiguity in both feedback and outcome. I’ve gotten to the point where I don’t even consider education (either as a plus or minus) anymore.
  - michaelrpeskin 3y ago
    I'm not sure how to tell the difference. As an interviewer, I'm decent at picking up subtle negative signals and there are people that I voted against that the rest of the team said yes to. And I have a 100% record of them quitting/being managed out in less than a year. But, there are other people I was pretty neutral on that turned out to be awesome. So that means I need to get better at interviewing and finding positive signals. But I guess your comment about people who spend 9 weeks studying is exactly the people I'm not looking for. People who talk about how hard school was because they were "studying" all the time are the people who are working for the grade, not just doing stuff they love. I know that talent and interest are not evenly distributed in the population. And if you actually are good at something you're interested in it's also vanishingly rare that it's something someone will pay you for. So I'm not trying to make the "if you love what you do, you won't work a day in your life" argument. I'm just saying, that there are people who are interested in something, they're also talented and do good work, and it's something that someone will pay for. Those are the people I'm looking for. It's unfair, but true.
nomemory 3y ago
We live in a small country with few decent highschools and universities.

michaelrpeskin 3y ago

I’d rather have people who are internally motivated to do good work. I don’t look for people who get good grades for the sake of getting good grades. But people who have good grades as a byproduct of just wanting to do well. I think it’s a pretty good signal for me.

DinaCoder99 3y ago
> I don’t look for people who get good grades for the sake of getting good grades. But people who have good grades as a byproduct of just wanting to do well. What is the distinction? Surely a "internally motivated" person would be driven to learn regardless of grades. Anyway, I'm fairly certain nobody will ever work for you out of simply "internal motivation".
- michaelrpeskin 3y ago
  I'll use an example outside my field. I have a friend who's a mechanical engineer. He's smart and pretty talented, and is a real hard worker. But the reason he's a mechanical engineer is that he wasn't good at theoretical physics and by going "down" a step, he was able to apply all the physics ideas to mechanical engineering. So he was able to do well in the field. But it's not what he "does for fun". There are also people at his small company who spend every weekend building race cars just for fun. They have barns full of engines and tools (I'm jealous of how much space they can afford out in the rural areas!). The reason that they are such good engineers is that they find it fun. They do it in their spare time for fun. They find solving these kind of problems fun. So when they go to work during the week, they're having fun which makes them really good at what they do. My friend said it to me before that "you can't beat someone who does it for fun" and that's just about for everything. If you look at the best hedge fund managers, sure they had more money than I did to get started. But they also find it fun to do (what I think is) the drudgery of learning the space that they're working in. So back to grades...if you find someone with good grades who sounds like they worked for the good grades, that's fine, they're a hard worker and you probably won't go wrong with them. But if you find someone with good grades who just was having fun solving problems and happened to get good grades, then you have a real winner. And I think you need to just talk to people and see what they say. You can tell the "grinds" from the others. I'm also careful to keep in mind that lots of it is luck: having interest (finding it fun), talent (also being good at it), and value (someone willing to pay for it) doesn't make you a better person, it just makes you good at the one thing that someone wants. For example, the things that I find fun are related so solving certain kinds of mathematical problems with software. I was able to find a company that needs that, but there are very small number of places that need what I love. If I had to work for Big Software Co, I'd be ok at it, but wouldn't be a 10x developer. I guess I'm just saying that luck plays a lot into it.
paulcole 3y ago
How do you tell the difference? People who excel academically (in my experience) often have a rough transition to the working world because the feedback loop is so different from what they’ve trained themselves to be successful at. They go from 9 weeks of studying to being declared excellent and moving on to something else and repeating the process to a lot more ambiguity in both feedback and outcome. I’ve gotten to the point where I don’t even consider education (either as a plus or minus) anymore.
- michaelrpeskin 3y ago
  I'm not sure how to tell the difference. As an interviewer, I'm decent at picking up subtle negative signals and there are people that I voted against that the rest of the team said yes to. And I have a 100% record of them quitting/being managed out in less than a year. But, there are other people I was pretty neutral on that turned out to be awesome. So that means I need to get better at interviewing and finding positive signals. But I guess your comment about people who spend 9 weeks studying is exactly the people I'm not looking for. People who talk about how hard school was because they were "studying" all the time are the people who are working for the grade, not just doing stuff they love. I know that talent and interest are not evenly distributed in the population. And if you actually are good at something you're interested in it's also vanishingly rare that it's something someone will pay you for. So I'm not trying to make the "if you love what you do, you won't work a day in your life" argument. I'm just saying, that there are people who are interested in something, they're also talented and do good work, and it's something that someone will pay for. Those are the people I'm looking for. It's unfair, but true.

nomemory 3y ago

We live in a small country with few decent highschools and universities.