4 ms·

It should be self evident: all firms are hierarchies and all employees are hired by superior rather than inferior rank. The more controversial implied judgement

by 001sky 13y ago

It should be self evident: all firms are hierarchies and all employees are hired by superior rather than inferior rank. The more controversial implied judgement is that man seek to outrank women in marriage, in effect making the spouse an inferior 'vp' to 'ceo' relation. Although, there is plenty of data to support such a preference empirically (ie, partiarchy). <dons flame suit>

TallGuyShort 13y ago
I understand your explanation, but I'd still like to see evidence because I haven't felt the same. I've interviewed many dozen's of individuals over the past few years, and when I reflect on those that received offers from me they were practically always those with the best credentials, and I can't think of any of them who doesn't have a better education than I had. I'm likely the exception rather than the rule - but still - I'd like evidence on the assumption, as GP said.
SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
Anecdotal, but: Once when I was interviewed, I was almost rejected by the interviewer because it seemed like I had been programming for longer than he had been (he was thinking out loud). When he realized he'd started at a younger age, and had maybe a year on me, he decided it WAS OK, that he did have "more experience." He's a smart guy, but I've always wondered at that -- wouldn't it be BETTER to hire people smarter than you, rather than the alternative?
- 001sky 13y ago
  Its important to distinguish (a) talent from (b) rank. The latter is best thought of as Rank=f(talent, experience). It never makes sense to hire the wrong rank, or to invert the rank in a junior/senior reporting role. Hiring top talent is really a separate qustion, but its implied that A players with a lead in experience will outdistance A player of lesser experience...as they both acquire experience linearly together.[1] [1] Hence you are more likely to successfully hire and incorporate A talent only if you have it to begin with. Senior rank B talent struggles when junior experience A talent is aquired. The benefit of increasing experience accrues disporportionately to the higher talent A, and eventually a rank conflict ensues as the Junior A group catch up and surpass the (previously) Senior B's. A messy promotion/re-organiztion situation typically ensues.
  - SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
    Interesting point. We certainly did end up clashing in the years we worked together, as I am not shy in expressing my opinions about what needs to be done. It came to a head at one point, and the result was a reorg so that he was no longer my direct supervisor; I threatened to walk if the situation continued. The manager I reported to next wasn't particularly higher "rank", by your f(), since I had at least equivalent talent and more experience, but he was comfortable with the relationship(instead of acting like he felt threatened by it), and as such made a much better manager.
- Turing_Machine 13y ago
  'Steve [Jobs] believed that A players hire A players—that is people who are as good as they are. I refined this slightly—my theory is that A players hire people even better than themselves. It’s clear, though, that B players hire C players so they can feel superior to them, and C players hire D players. If you start hiring B players, expect what Steve called “the bozo explosion” to happen in your organization.' — Guy Kawasaki

by 001sky 13y ago

TallGuyShort 13y ago

I understand your explanation, but I'd still like to see evidence because I haven't felt the same. I've interviewed many dozen's of individuals over the past few years, and when I reflect on those that received offers from me they were practically always those with the best credentials, and I can't think of any of them who doesn't have a better education than I had. I'm likely the exception rather than the rule - but still - I'd like evidence on the assumption, as GP said.

SomeCallMeTim 13y ago

Anecdotal, but: Once when I was interviewed, I was almost rejected by the interviewer because it seemed like I had been programming for longer than he had been (he was thinking out loud). When he realized he'd started at a younger age, and had maybe a year on me, he decided it WAS OK, that he did have "more experience." He's a smart guy, but I've always wondered at that -- wouldn't it be BETTER to hire people smarter than you, rather than the alternative?

001sky 13y ago
Its important to distinguish (a) talent from (b) rank. The latter is best thought of as Rank=f(talent, experience). It never makes sense to hire the wrong rank, or to invert the rank in a junior/senior reporting role. Hiring top talent is really a separate qustion, but its implied that A players with a lead in experience will outdistance A player of lesser experience...as they both acquire experience linearly together.[1] [1] Hence you are more likely to successfully hire and incorporate A talent only if you have it to begin with. Senior rank B talent struggles when junior experience A talent is aquired. The benefit of increasing experience accrues disporportionately to the higher talent A, and eventually a rank conflict ensues as the Junior A group catch up and surpass the (previously) Senior B's. A messy promotion/re-organiztion situation typically ensues.
- SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
  Interesting point. We certainly did end up clashing in the years we worked together, as I am not shy in expressing my opinions about what needs to be done. It came to a head at one point, and the result was a reorg so that he was no longer my direct supervisor; I threatened to walk if the situation continued. The manager I reported to next wasn't particularly higher "rank", by your f(), since I had at least equivalent talent and more experience, but he was comfortable with the relationship(instead of acting like he felt threatened by it), and as such made a much better manager.
Turing_Machine 13y ago
'Steve [Jobs] believed that A players hire A players—that is people who are as good as they are. I refined this slightly—my theory is that A players hire people even better than themselves. It’s clear, though, that B players hire C players so they can feel superior to them, and C players hire D players. If you start hiring B players, expect what Steve called “the bozo explosion” to happen in your organization.' — Guy Kawasaki