this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
1290 points (98.0% liked)

ADHD memes

8037 readers
2163 users here now

ADHD Memes

The lighter side of ADHD


Rules

  1. No Party Pooping

Other ND communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This doesn't make logical sense. If candidates are studying for what will get them jobs then that wouldn't make them experts in what is needed for the job but the frivolous bullshit that will get them hired.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think most people who hire people prefer a personal recommendation because they are never trained on how to spot talent. When they can’t take that shortcut, they grasp at straws.

Rarely do you come across someone who actually knows how to pick the best candidate.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Or, picking the best candidate is inherently an impossible task given too little data and too much variability in people's responses and ability to read the interviewer and give them what they want.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Maybe. To me it seems that you could become good at it if you worked at it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

This is worth watching in its entirety but it points out why interviewers are rarely actually experts in any way: https://youtu.be/5eW6Eagr9XA?si=n39py_-N_gPzPYGa

In short, the only way to get good at something is to try it repeatedly with feedback. Generalized interviewers / HR perform enough interviews to get better at them, but they don't get meaningful feedback. Whether or not a candidate is actually good for a job often won't be clear for months to years and an HR interviewer is often completely disconnected from that.

Conversely an on-team interviewer might get to see a candidate grow and perform, but simply doesn't perform enough interviews to get good at it. They're too busy working on the team doing stuff and most teams aren't hiring that many people, that often, for them to get enough sample data.

And these forces oppose each other, the more actual task work you do, the less you'll be interviewing others, both because you're busy doing other stuff and because if you're focused in a niche task then you'll have less expertise to interview a broader range of positions. But the more broadly your responsibilities, the less of an expert you are. Same thing with team size, the larger the team, the more hires, but also the more people to do the interviews.

Companies value referrals because the whole interview process is inherently flawed and unfixable.