3 ms·

Very interesting story.. weird how this WSJ article references an HN thread I feel like a group panel interview would skew candidates in a different way than a

Very interesting story.. weird how this WSJ article references an HN thread I feel like a group panel interview would skew candidates in a different way than a one on one. There's some psychology around how people act in groups at play that might really mask the viability of a candidate.. for instance in group social settings, wouldn't whoever's the most dominantly confident (or just loud), going to have an outside advantage in impressing the interviewer?

golergka 11y ago
It's a second time today I see people talking about discussions on HN that significantly influenced their life (the other was about freelancing).
worldvoyageur 11y ago
Where I work, we make extensive use of group simulations in our hiring decisions. With a well designed scenario, defined roles for group members and contentious issues that must be resolved, you really learn a lot about how people add value, or subtract it, in a group setting. The hiring team forms a circle at a discrete distance around the group and each of us has an assigned person to watch. That way we can catch body language etc. When doing this, it is remarkable how some people can in a low key, quiet way, bring missing information into the discussion, sway the group or bring it to a constructive consensus. We love those people and they have a high success rate when we hire them. It is pretty normal that a very impressive candidate one-on-one looks very different in the group setting, and vise versa. We tend only to hire the people that do well in both the one on one and the group. Oh - the loud dominant strategy is very hard to pull off successfully in a group context. There is too much risk of it being obvious (to the hiring team watching) that it subtracted value.
- rhizome 11y ago
  Do you work for The Landmark Forum?

3 ms·

Very interesting story.. weird how this WSJ article references an HN thread I feel like a group panel interview would skew candidates in a different way than a

by rwhitman 11y ago

golergka 11y ago
It's a second time today I see people talking about discussions on HN that significantly influenced their life (the other was about freelancing).
worldvoyageur 11y ago
Where I work, we make extensive use of group simulations in our hiring decisions. With a well designed scenario, defined roles for group members and contentious issues that must be resolved, you really learn a lot about how people add value, or subtract it, in a group setting. The hiring team forms a circle at a discrete distance around the group and each of us has an assigned person to watch. That way we can catch body language etc. When doing this, it is remarkable how some people can in a low key, quiet way, bring missing information into the discussion, sway the group or bring it to a constructive consensus. We love those people and they have a high success rate when we hire them. It is pretty normal that a very impressive candidate one-on-one looks very different in the group setting, and vise versa. We tend only to hire the people that do well in both the one on one and the group. Oh - the loud dominant strategy is very hard to pull off successfully in a group context. There is too much risk of it being obvious (to the hiring team watching) that it subtracted value.
- rhizome 11y ago
  Do you work for The Landmark Forum?