Why most job interviews are pointless

[@DeadCat-42]

HR we can't find engineers.. Ok how do you recruit? Well first we collected tens of thousands of applications and resumes.. Then we judged the engineers on their writing abilities. Then we interviewed them and judged ENGINEERS On how they dress, and how outgoing they were personally ..

[@gauloise6442]

We had HR people who have no experience in or knowledge of engineering interview them.

[@stephenlee5929]

@@gauloise6442 I'm guessing in the Judge/Convict interviews, we should use convicts to do the interviews?

[@beastybaiter7378]

@@stephenlee5929 that might actually work pretty well if you can get some genuinely reformed ones.

[@NeyamRye]

Ughhhh

[@skycloud4802]

This hits autistic people extremely hard because many are introverted, dress inappropriately, or don't understand social cues. Sadly, these overlooked jobseekers are probably some with the most potential talent.

[@visceratrocar]

Interviews are pointless because there is no way to judge a person's entire character and pick apart specific pieces of their personality in a 5 minute interview.

[@skyblazeeterno]

I think shows like The Traitors show people are poor judges of character and CANNOT spot bullshitters and liars...and that's over an extended period of time so God knows how poor it is over 30 minutes or so of an interview

[@Oflaherty86]

I'd agree for 99% but I have had the odd interview where the candidate has said a single thing that made me hire them and turned out to be some of the best hires ever, based on one turn of phrase.

[@Oflaherty86]

@@sebastianforbes1 No likes doing the work they're paid to do. That's why we're paid to do it 🙄

[@mizutofu]

@@Oflaherty86 placebo effect

[@PermanentExile]

@@Oflaherty86Similarly, I’ve had interviews where someone said one thing that clearly eliminated them as a sound hire, e.g., “If they’re willing to say that when their guard is up during a 30-minute job interview, what will they say in front of my customers after they’ve started to let their guard down?”

[@neptun2810]

The fact that we all are actually training for an interview is proof of how pointless job interviews are. I once had a company tell me "your qualifications are great and we have no doubt that you could do this job, but your self-presentation was not that good, so we can't offer you the job". Me response was like "that's fine; I don't want to work for someone with such an extreme kind of bad judgement anyway"

[@SpilledRooibos]

Yep, sounds like measuring the quality of a shovel by how clean it is

[@kaboom9573]

I had a manager pull that crap. I had been working literally alongside her for months, was more qualified and had better numbers than other candidates, but didn't get the job because of my interview answers. Wild.

[@marikothecheetah9342]

That's me! I mean, I always wondered how can they determine I am good for the job if they saw me once for 30 minutes. :/

[@yanasosnovskaya864]

the fun fact is also that the job itself will be boring as well.

[@westernsellers9148]

​@@kaboom9573women= tard HR kweenz

[@nrclever8167]

a lot of jobs are reserved for friends and families already

[@_nimrod92]

This!

[@SpilledRooibos]

Our "meritocracy" is full of nepotism

[@laughinggiraffe9176]

But they still need to interview a ton of people just to pretend to be meritocratic and waste people’s time.

[@therearenoshortcuts9868]

late stage empire nepotism > ability enjoy the ride to the collapse

[@normbograham3]

Even at one company, that would not hire people in your family as it was against their policies, had hired a woman, and her husband, and their cousins, before long, there were about 6 of them in a small group, all from India.

[@shripleypibbles]

I hate that I would basically have to be a good liar to get hired. I’m neurodivergent, it’s really difficult.

[@shawn576]

Yeah this is a real problem. You can never say "I would love to learn that" (a true statement) because it means they'll require 5 minutes to show you something. You need to just blatantly lie and say you can do everything and make up stories about how you've done it. Something universally true of real experts is that they rarely give solid answers. They say "we could possibly do that if...." or "I believe we could do that if ...." The people who don't know anything are much more likely to give definitive answers like "of course we can do X", and those morons are the ones HR love the most.

[@fredmercury1314]

@@shawn576 Not sure that's really true. I've hired several people over the years who didn't have the right knowledge but had really good attitudes, over people who had the right knowledge and a bad attitude.

[@jstoner9029]

@@fredmercury1314exactly

[@BlunderMunchkin]

I just got passed over in an interview because I told the truth. The interviewer asked me why I was interested in the company, and I said I'm not interested in the company, I'm interested in the job. Apparently they wanted me to bullshit them about how working for an advertising company would fulfill some deep inner need. The fact that I'm a professional with 20 years of experience who does solid work for fair pay is not relevant. And yes, I knew my answer would tank my chances to get the job, but I'm tired of the nonsense.

[@amicaaranearum]

Ever since I was young, I’ve dreamed of transforming unstructured data into actionable business insights.

[@fredmercury1314]

They didn't want you to BS them, they wanted someone who's interested in the company. That's their right, they don't have to hire you. I don't mean this to be insulting but... _You're coming across as being a little entitled..._ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ They want someone who _wants_ to work there and you're clearly not it, but now you're moaning about it.

[@fredmercury1314]

@@amicaaranearum Take me now, you dirty boy.

[@entreprenr1476]

"Apparently they wanted me to bullshit ..." Obviously they wanted someone who is ACTUALLY interested in the company and not bullshitting. This is just you not being able to imagine that someone else might actually feel that way because you don't and can only see your own perspective. The interview was a success: They wanted someone like that, and you are not that, so they didn't hire you. And now you're complaining, even though the outcome was correct.

[@RustyShacklefardd]

I can understand the frustration, but if you need the job you have to play the game sadly

[@thijsjong]

Why do you want to work for Tesco. I want to make money. This should conclude the interview.

[@marcus.H]

Would you trust someone who said "I just always dreamed of stacking shelves. Mopping floors makes me happy"? I'd trust someone who says "i need money" since i know they have a serious reason for working for me. And as long as they need money, they will want to come back for that weekly paycheck.

[@thijsjong]

@@marcus.H I think money is the nr1 reason to work. I think reason nr 2 falls miles behind nr 2. Thats why I think it is a stupid question.

[@marcus.H]

@@thijsjong exactly. If someone works because it's a hobby, that will often result in them growing tired of that hobby and quitting. The best motivator in most cases is "I want to pay my mortgage each month and drive a nice car"

[@Volkbrecht]

If you apply for bottom rung positions like stacking shelves you won't even get asked that kind of question. Big corporations are not completely stupid. But what if you want to become a store manager? Or, god beware, a marketer? You should be able to pretend enthusiasm for the brand whose image you are going to take responsibility for.

[@stephenlee5929]

@@marcus.H Are you sure? I have worked with a number of people, whose main reason for a given job was not the money, they had other opportunities which gave higher financial rewards. Many people work because they enjoy the job.

[@seandavies5130]

I think, if you observe people and society enough, the obvious conclusion is that we are terrible at judging character. We keep electing egomaniacs, keep promoting snake oil salesmen etc. We never seem to learn from these mistakes and at worst, never even realise what happened

[@lordblazer]

it gets worse, people are fast to scorn literally decent people, while exalting the worse kind of people imaginable. This isn't just in who we allow to lead, but also who we choose to form relationships with in real life.

[@emb21982]

Exactly and even when those people fail at their job or do terrible things the majority of the company are quick to have their back rather than the people they bullied or scapegoated just because they are "charming" or have been in the job a long time. Most companies continue to fire anyone who stands up to terrible managers, even if the manager contributes very little and the person they are firing is exceptional at their job.

[@ryanjacobson2508]

Part of that is because those drawn to fame and power have higher levels of narcissism and sociopathy than people who don't wish to climb the ladder.

[@dhenderson1810]

The USA voting Trump back as President proves this.

[@seandavies5130]

@@dhenderson1810 yes, although I'd prefer if I was proven wrong on this occasion 😂

[@laughinggiraffe9176]

If you try to select for the right “personality type” by how people answer interview questions, you will end up selecting people who are more willing to lie to get ahead.

[@nikicarrie4071]

Yes

[@humpteedumptee8629]

This is why I pass on any job with a bs 200 question survey. It’s a waste of time and is designed to be lied to.

[@fredmercury1314]

Not if you know what you're doing.

[@nikicarrie4071]

@fredmercury1314 humans are fooled easily and always choose the same type for the job

[@bobbarker1798]

Possible. I don't lie though. Don't cheat either. Don't like liars either

[@muhdiversity7409]

At least they are giving interviews. In some fields you are required to solve some idiotic puzzle before they even bother to interview you. Doesn't matter how many years of experience or all the things you may have designed and built, it all boils down to some idiotic puzzle games.

[@kristianlavigne8270]

Yup 👍 Software Industry comes to mind… 😂

[@lordblazer]

@@kristianlavigne8270 ooo it doesn't help that HR gets arrogant about it too.. You can even explain an answer to the question the answer is correct, but it isn't on their script they were given... even though the problem they asked to solve is something that has multiple solutions to. there are some good ways to mitigate this, mostly having someone from the team to have a conversation with on how the problem solving process worked on the candidate's end, but a lot of companies have gotten lazy about this in recent years.

[@OanaTheMeerkat]

@@kristianlavigne8270 At least it's a puzzle. I once lost an interview when the HR asked me - if you wanted to be a fruit, what fruit would you choose and why? (went out of the interview laughing)

[@therearenoshortcuts9868]

coming soon: interview question: what is the meaning of life? LOL

[@climate_sentry_123]

​@@therearenoshortcuts986842

[@stephenlee5929]

My guess on why most interviews are pointless, the interviewer does not know what they need.

[@catatonicbug7522]

I wonder if we could come up with a similar method for interviewees to determine if they should accept an offer. After all, job interviews are two-way conversations.

[@SpilledRooibos]

Yeah, I think that could work pretty well

[@beastybaiter7378]

@catatonicbug7522 I've turned down a few offers cause of bad vibes from managers. An interview is a 2 way thing.

[@leeweesquee]

I got interviewed for a Social Work position for a non-profit. Essentially wanted me to drive around and sign people up for the service. I asked them how they really get their funding. They let it slip it was how many people they signed up. I asked them if all the workers were a means to an end? I walked out. Heard this agency shut there office not long after

[@catatonicbug7522]

@@leeweesquee were they selling makeup, vitamins, or leggings?

[@tigernotwoods914]

One thing I hate the most is when an interviewer says so tell me about yourself. It’s awkward for the person being asked it’s awkward for the one asking the question nobody likes it, but it’s continued to be used When I interview people specifically use this line because I hate it so much

[@timothygibney159]

Here here. 20 years ago it was what’s your biggest weakness. Now it’s this in every interview. It is pure laziness

[@717379]

I used to do a lot of interviews for the catering industry. They were just formalities to identify things that could only reveal themselves in person such as personal hygiene, personality conflicts, avoidant/oppositional attitude, etc... I was keenly aware that I was solely led by my guts and I accepted it. It was also an important opportunity for the interviewees themselves to get a feel of the place and start a dialogue. The real "interview" was the training period which was between 1 and 3 weeks, depending on the job, and during which either one of us could call it quits (with full pay and without notice). It was very successful and the employees themselves appreciated being given the opportunity to adapt to the team and not stress about "make or break moments".

[@Volkbrecht]

And that's the difference between you and people making uninformed videos about the topic: you actually have experience in the field :) In the end, the industry is not that stupid. The people who actually make the decisions tend to have a pretty good idea about what interviews can and cannot tell them about people.

[@RecruiterAbbas]

I am a recruitment specialist myself. Much of the information from the video is already known to HR/Recruitment specialists with a master’s degree from a university. At university, you learn everything about recruitment and the studies that highlight the value or uselessness of certain testing methods. Unfortunately, too many recruiters are still insufficiently trained. In the Netherlands, a recruiter often only has a diploma at the higher vocational level, not at the university level. Many HR specialists at large companies are also inadequately trained. This partly explains why these pointless job interviews continue to exist. "You can't fight stupid."😅

[@Volkbrecht]

In most companies hiring decisions aren't made by HR, but by managers who, over the years, aquire a decent level of experience in how interview performance correlates with work performance and, most importantly, with people fitting into the teams they are hired for. This is IMO the biggest problem with HR professionals: it takes a long time before they ever get to aquire that specific experience. But the main reason for the persistent existence of job interviews is this: they do not break much. You rarely need the perfect hire. You mostly want average, and where that isn't enough, you pre-screen by degree and grades, which is a pretty representative intelligence test. People might claim differently, but the underlying reality looks different. In the end what is most important is spotting dealbreakers, not screening for perfection.

[@RecruiterAbbas]

@@Volkbrecht That's not entirely true. Hiring managers are usually co-partners in the overall recruitment process. However, you're right that their involvement often creates noise and doesn’t always lead to the best outcomes. The recruitment specialist or talent acquisition partner is the expert and should be able to present a solid plan to the team, based on proven insights, to attract the best candidate. Unfortunately, many recruiters aren't properly trained, and their managers often either lack the necessary knowledge or expertise. Finding the best candidate and placing them in the right role is a job for other specialists. Think of a headhunter, a sourcer, or a recruitment marketer. Each plays a crucial role in making sure the process runs smoothly.

[@richardsoos8902]

Don't call me stupid. 😂

[@SpilledRooibos]

​@@Volkbrechtthe problem is when a dealbreaker makes little to no sense, like the result of a myers Briggs personality test being a deal breaker. (Which does happen in the USA)

[@AS-np3yq]

Women should NOT have make up on their face in job interviews or in thr job. It is faking something and it is not how they really look. It is an competitive advantage against men.

[@chrisburn7178]

Regarding the meeting with Hitler, I don't think Chamberlain gets a fair rap. He was a clever guy and he knew that his letters to his sister would be general news soon. He simply didn't want to cause panic by letting on his realistic assessment. He knew Hitler was a psychopath and war was inevitable: there is a story that, on landing back in the UK he told one of his staff "I've bought us a maybe a year", which turned out to be surprisingly on the money.

[@cassiuslives4807]

Ultimately people are terrible at evaluating other people because the personality of the interviewer is variable. This is the same for doing performance reviews at jobs as well. For me, my interview criteria was simple: I left the fluffier questions to my colleagues, and I asked a developer to show me the git repo of a codebase they worked on, to explain its structure to me, and then I proposed a feature and asked them to show me where in the codebase they'd make the adjustments, and why. It took all the "niceities" out of the interview process, but it was effective for me in my particular field.

[@OanaTheMeerkat]

This works for jobs where people can actually show you a repo. What if the job is in accounting or law and it's my first job. I can't show you legal papers or financial documents, because it's illegal or because I don't have work experience beforehand. And no, you can't create a repo with a simulation that proves I am a good junior accountant. Combine this information with the fact that I'm autistic, meaning high probability and frequency of big stress, no eye-contact, can't multitask to save my own life, and I'm not very social (ex: I learnt to smile back and to do the stupid handshake thing late in my 20s), it was impossible for me to get a job in accounting (I will never understand why I must be sociable to get a job). I searched accountings jobs for 2 years. Then I changed to web programming and it worked. I'm weird but that's a good thing here. Yes my boss looked on my repos, asked me some questions, gave me a test, which I passed, then got the job. At my first job he told me - Oana, in this company you don't need to be insane, but it will help a lot. (worked here for 6 years ^_^)

[@cassiuslives4807]

@@OanaTheMeerkat "What if the job is in accounting or law and it's my first job." Good on you for getting a web dev job. Your question is a good one, and it depends on how good an accountant the hiring manager is. They need to ask questions about how to perform common tasks in that profession and measure the plausibility of the answers against the manager's own experience. That being said, I've never hired an accountant so there might be a bit extra that is needed.

[@Volkbrecht]

@@OanaTheMeerkat You have to be sociable in pretty much every job that is not remote work. I always smile when kids tell me they want to do "something with people". Most jobs out there are "something with people", even if the job is CNC machining in a workshop. It's rare that you don't have to somehow fit into a team, and managers don't like to consciously hire weirdos, because that can create undesireable dynamics. Individual performance is less important than a smoothly running team. On the other hand, don't let anybody tell you they can multitask. The human brain can't do it, autistic or not. It's one thing at a time, and switching fast between things to create the illusion of multitasking generally tends to take its toll on the quality of execution.

[@fredmercury1314]

I'm looking for someone who will fit into an existing team without conflict. That makes the team more productive, and it makes my life easier, and everyone else's. Of course I want the person most able to _do the work_ but what's the use of them being highly skilled if they can't work with other people, if they disrupt the team, and thus tank all the projects? _That's the point of the interview._

[@OanaTheMeerkat]

@@fredmercury1314 and how can you find out if I can work in a team or not? Just keep in mind that I can have an hour of interview. In that interview you can ask me any questions and also give me a technical test to see my skills. But if you ask me to work for one day to see how I cope with your team, then no. It is not an interview anymore. I want to be paid for 8 hours of work.

[@peteranderson7676]

Most job interviews are de facto beauty contests.

[@normbograham3]

Certainly, every promotion into management seems to fall into that summary.

[@tarabooartarmy3654]

I remember one remote video interview the guy who was interviewing me was sitting in his car and refused to make eye contact. He kept looking all around him at things in the parking lot and seemed incredibly disinterested. I had already made it through three other rounds of interviews but I knew with him it was over. I think the minute he saw me he knew he wasn’t going to go any further so he just rushed through the questions to get it over with. I was so confident I had that role until that point. It worked out though. I now make $40,000 a year more than I would have in that role and I love my job.

[@SpilledRooibos]

Why couldn't he just tell you that you weren't going to be hired?

[@sabrinagonzales4456]

That’s breadcrumbs, aim for a 6 figures income.

[@tarabooartarmy3654]

@@sabrinagonzales4456 I think you misunderstood. I make $40,000 a year more than I would have in the job I didn’t get. I’m making six figures now. 😊

[@hazelchief-rabbit5903]

​@@sabrinagonzales4456they said 40,000 a year *more* not that they made 40k a year

[@SpilledRooibos]

@@sabrinagonzales4456 "$40,000 a year more" The word "more" means they are likely currently making 6 figures.

[@chingompiew1]

Interviews in Japan were surprisingly pleasant. If you met their requirements on paper the interview was just a means to meet you in person. They seem to hire first come first served as long as qualifications are met. I got every job I applied for except for one because I didn’t meet a requirement.

[@camgere]

I did technical engineering interviews for years. What people claimed they could do on their resumes was quite different from what they could demonstrate. For management applicants, internships might be a better way of demonstrating skills. Henry Ford liked to hire everyone in through the factory. He figured Harvard MBAs would quickly show their management skills over high school dropouts. Plus, when they got into management, they would have some idea of the employees they were ordering around.

[@deadlypandaghost]

Can confirm. However I will also say that the way many technical interviews are conducted,at least in software, are really pointless. They focus far to much on the person being able to recall specific tidbits of information from a massive amount possible rather than on actual ability to apply knowledge.

[@camgere]

@@deadlypandaghost If you can come up with questions that demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge, then you have a career in interviewing. Just throwing the "really hard" Leetcode questions at people may just demonstrate the ability to cram for a test. I always gave very basic questions, so I think that is fair if you claim to have years of experience at something. I remember suffering through the tricky-clever interview questions. Why are manhole covers round? If you know, you know, (or have heard the question before) if you don't you don't. Manhole covers aren't EXACTLY cylindrical. Nor are the "holes" they go into. The trick is in the details.

[@SurmaSampo]

Henry Ford also fired his accountant every six months and conspired to overthrow the USA government so let's not pretend he was great at all decision making. I am also certain he didn't make all staff start on the factory floor. It is also an approach that may well not be practical in the modern context.

[@lordblazer]

what I did for technical interviews was to just ask core things to the job... you use python to load and manipulate data.. ok, use python to load a CSV file. show the top 5 rows and bottom 5 rows, now show us the data types of each column... it's very basic, but I always look at the library they use.. I won't ask to do the fibonocci pattern in python..... while it isn't difficult, it is irrelevant to what they'll be doing.

[@SpilledRooibos]

​@@lordblazerif it doesn't contain an if statement or a loop, then it isn't testing their ability to do much of anything. Real programing skill is the ability to understand and restructure if statements and loops for the desired outcome. Most of everything else is memorization and looking things up on a website like github (things that anyone can do).

[@badbabybear1]

A lot of hiring managers and recruiters are inept and bad at not only judging other people but understanding what exactly a particular role requires and how a candidate would fit into that. There's all these inane superficial questions and focus on surface stuff like charm, giving the right answer, etc. Very little of it focuses on the actual tasks and suitability. People have all sorts of cognitive biases they're not even aware of. The whole application process is broken and outdated but people like to cling to traditional formalities because it's what they know and everyone else does it.

[@marianhunt8899]

The algorithms have been scientifically proven to have in built biases too. Not surprising as they're trained by humans 😂. Not sure it's that easy to avoid biases but of course everything should be done to minimise them.

[@icanhasutoobz]

@@marianhunt8899 The AI tools have trained in (not actually built-in per se) biases, yes. Basic statistical processes don't have in-built (nor trained in) biases. However, things like ranking/scoring that involve human choices certainly still can suffer from hidden human biases and general subjectivity. There's a similar problem in science. The scientific method itself is fine, but scientists can introduce their biases in their choices of experimental design (what to study and how, what hypothesis to pursue), and what evidence they do and do not consider, such as experimental evidence/data that gets thrown out as anomalous, but may actually be legitimately disproving the experiment's hypothesis, and ultimately may get thrown out because it was inconveniently incongruent with the expected outcome of the experiment (which is not how the scientific method actually works, but is entirely consistent with patterns of behaviors based on human biases). In other words, the algorithms of basic statistics are not in themselves capable of bias (though AI/machine learning absolutely is), but they are also not capable of setting up the problems they're applied to, or how they're applied. And since the latter necessarily involves humans, it's difficult to see how (or even if) bias can actually be completely removed from the process. Any scoring/ranking will likely always be a grey area, reliant on subjective judgments (or it will become the province of AI, and thus subject to unavoidable trained-in biases, and without any human empathy, compassion, or bigger picture reasoning to regulate or correct its choices).

[@dhenderson1810]

​@@marianhunt8899 When AI disqualifies resumes for not using key words directly from the job ad, rather than based on your experience and education, it is flawed. It is also a lazy way to hire.

[@ernestorodriguez6445]

I think you miss a point with the AI/statistical approaches. They are more effective in a world where traditional interviews are the norm, but if those would be the norm, it is much easier to people to prepare and "fool" those approaches once they know what is being tested.

[@taylor3950]

True, most measures can be gamed

[@icanhasutoobz]

AI tools already have trained in biases, especially LLMs (they couldn't not, given the massive amount of at best poorly curated (at least WRT evidence of biases) organic human data they've been trained on). Statistical approaches on their own don't have this trained in bias (since they're not trained, but out-of-the-box, purely mathematical algorithms independent of specific inputs). However, _humans_ are the ones using/applying them, and most importantly, the ones doing the scoring/ranking in the approach Kahneman described, and the decision about how and where to use it, what questions to ask and what areas to focus on, as well as scoring criteria for answers are all ultimately subjective (regardless of how well justified they might be in the specific context), and thus vulnerable to human biases. For example, I found his (Kahneman's) choice of "Pride" as a category to be puzzling and useless; perhaps it makes somewhat more sense in a martial situation (though I'm really not convinced there either), but in terms of job interviews, that seems like a pointless and completely irrelevant characteristic to focus on (not to mention antithetical for companies that seem only to want compliant, obedient drones lacking the pride/self-worth to push back on onerous and unnecessary conditions and requirements, such as being in-office in roles that literally have no legitimate requirement for it). The point about game-ability of such systems, especially AI systems, is spot-on, though. It's something I've been known to soapbox about on LinkedIn (when I still used that dumpster fire).

[@marcel3942]

No they are not.

[@eltonlovell9898]

As a 52 year old who's been a company director for over 25 years, listen... it's the age of the side-gig and the silly-skill. The stuff you used to park till you were retired while you pursued your career is today's pay-dirt. Online, in person.. people may not be buying art, your songs or your writing, but they are paying through the nose to be taught, tutored and mentored. People make their livings filming themselves camping - times have changed, everyone can do your job, but your unique dumb thing sells!

[@ummijaan1448]

What connection does your comment has to the point of the video?

[@ejcash7234]

@@ummijaan1448 Yeah, I'm asking myself the same question.

[@dhenderson1810]

​@@ummijaan1448I think he is saying to not waste time interviewing for a real job when the real money is in hobbies or being a Tiktoker or KZbinr.

[@darkcharmrecords]

​@@dhenderson1810 Bingo... If you have a cat, film it and upload. Millions will watch .. you get paid. Be consistent

[@normbograham3]

Years ago, job interviews, were a gantlet of people you needed to get past to get the job. Including the receptionist. Unfortunately, it was also an opportunity for people to inject their bias. An officer, whom did not want to hire an older person, would never let them pass the interview. A guy might be impartial towards those in his religious group, or lean towards people from his home country. And if you were a good looking woman in tech, they would usher you in, even if you were not qualified. (But, they were also later sued for discrimination, from the same woman they bent the procedure for).

[@darrentwiss3202]

A limitation I see to adapting this is the difficulty of drafting these tests. Kahneman's traits include 'Sociability' and 'Energy Level'. If you're hiring an accountant or cleaner it's far from clear these are 2 of your 6 most important traits. I would struggle to identify what the best traits are, what the optimal levels are - you don't want someone so social they spend all their time talking, nor so antisocial they refuse to talk at all for example - and finally how would you verify these reliably? It's a very interesting idea but I'm unsure how it could be used in practice

[@falsificationism]

Keen insight, but Meehl discusses this issue in depth. The takeaway from his work in the 1950s is that even if we use clinicians' own subjective beta weights (the things they value most...even if those values are misguided), using actuarial judgment (i.e., consistently rating all applicants on those traits of interest, summing them up, and then comparing across candidates STILL outperforms subjective clinical judgment (i.e., getting a _vibe_ from a candidate, summing up the gist in our heads, and then comparing what was in our head after one interview to what was in our head at the end of the others).

[@PinkDiamond7777777]

"You can't just do marketing for just 30 minutes." Louder for the people at the back!

[@marcvslicinivscrassvs7536]

Most companies have an internal candidate ready. They just have to go through the motions of publishing the job opening and interviewing applicants (both internal and external).

[@therearenoshortcuts9868]

companies post "interview rounds" to threaten the internal candidates

[@AndreasScout]

Here is an example for a job i went for after getting my dual masters in Mathematics and Economics from one the worlds top 10 best universities in the world: Diplomat job opening. Tests: preliminary interview with low level person at the gov "job bureau" based on your resume ( if you didnt have a masters degree you would not get in), then a series of tests ( akin to the "which figure follows that one" malarkey), then another interview with embassy staff, then 14 different tests ( some case studies which i got 95/100 one of the highest scores out there, to psychological mumbojumbo junk which i did very well 2 about average 80%), then a special case study, then an interview with other gov officials, another interview with intelligence and bachground checks, then the actual interview with HR where high ups were present and then... getting the notification that you "were the perfect candidate BUT we currently arent hiring"

[@ummijaan1448]

I'm glad you didn't follow the path of that one Austrian painter.

[@Don.Challenger]

1,/ Wait a second: Isn't the probationary period an extended situational interview? 2./ And, why not try a conditional/intentional interview: Ask the candidate what they will agree to do using a list of job related and general tasks and what they would require from the company in return (this would develop from actual job demands of the ongoing company workforce) and rank those intentions and choose from that. (Yes suspiciously this is like a Performance Improvement Plan from the get go.) 3./ Then monitor, counsel and weed out those who fail to perform.

[@ChrisParlett]

I had a face to face job interview in 2016 and didn't get it. Applied again this year with same level of education and related experience. The process this time was virtual with tests. Got in.

[@highrzr]

All interviewers care about is finding the cheapest person that spews out all the correct buzz words. To be honest, most interviewers wouldn't hire themselves.

[@james10492]

6:27 I think you meant to say 'if he reneged on his promises' (not renegaded)

[@Michael-cb5nm]

Yeah, it’s these kinds of errors that make me wonder if this is just really good AI narration. “Renegaded” is not even a word…

[@ellisburton8733]

Look around the average office ,clock the number of people who are 'less than stellar at their job', that's how great the conventional job interview works 😢😢😢😢😢. Friends and family are usually a really bad fit also and they often leave quite soon, by observation...

[@smithw7288]

I have to interview people all the time for my restaurant. I have no idea how good the employee will be until they are actually working the job. Wish I had a better way to assess the employees besides just hiring and firing.

[@elharrop]

Do a paid trial day

[@Arkansya]

interviews are terrible... but it's not a problem, there is no humane point into recruiters having so much power over applicants, bosses should learn to live with it.

[@BrandXsps]

I'm a HD mechanic and recently started proctoring the skills test portion of the hiring process at my work. We recently had some interviews and I got to see the candidates in action. The interview is a combination of a skills test and a panel interview. We needed to hire 3 mechanics and interviewed 4. I felt that 3 of the 4 would have been a good fit for the company and were capable of doing the job. We only hired 1 because they all did so poorly on the panel interview. We've been running 9 mechanics short for years because management thinks the panel interview is the most important part of the process. We have 3 more guys retiring in the next 6 months and we still have no new workers. Great job management team.

[@arnoldmiga5689]

The real reason is to make impression of the management of "the cavalry is coming" i.e. "we know you are crazy busy, we are doing our best to help you but there is nothing we can do if we have no candidates" while working you, the existing team to the bone, squeezing the last cent out of it.

[@weirdo1060]

Anecdote about Chamberlain and Hitler is an important reminder of history. Highly charismatic people can fool experienced interviewers. Neville failed to consider that Adolf’s narcissistic behavior could be a cover for actual genocidal intentions.

[@johngray3449]

Then explain why the jews are now 100% hypocrites.

[@android584]

I think history has proven that going to war with Germany cemented the UK's demise. Hitler viewed the UK as a natural ally (he underestimated how corrupt it was).

[@TheodoreChin-ih7xz]

The English were doing the same thing as Hitler, except they did it in India and Africa instead of Europe so Europeans never cared.

[@jameslangstonevans]

People insist on interviewing because we all trust our own biases.

[@duskmare0000]

I think there's a single flaw with this video. Interviews aren't designed to get the best candidate. They're designed to weed out the worst candidates. To be specific, the worst communicators. Most areas of work require communication skills, so the sole purpose of an interview is to invite someone to talk in person so that you can see how good their communication skills are. Anyone can take the time to write a well worded email but not everyone can speak without mumbling, make eye contact, listen well, etc. Plus, anyone can write on a CV that they have certain skills, and can look up relevant information before writing an email. On the spot in an interview, relevant questions about knowledge they claim to have could catch out a liar.

[@laylah150]

Life is unfair for those of us with stutters and neuro divergencies. Getting ready for an interview will take a lot of mental tax and planning for at least a week. Speaking doesn't come easy to us.

[@huwpickrell1209]

​​@@laylah150 exactly I'm brilliant in my field but am not the most articulate and find interviews intimidating and v challenging. My communication is not the best probably because I'm probably v slightly autistic, but my work ethic is v desirable.

[@SpilledRooibos]

If they are designed to weed out the worst candidates, then why are there ever multiple rounds of interviews? If you've removed the bad candidates already, what do the next interviews do?

[@duskmare0000]

@@SpilledRooibos Honestly, they're probably testing for desperation. People willing to put up with multiple rounds of interviews and being messed about by the company before they're even employed will be more likely to settle for a lower salary, worse hours and a worse work environment.

[@haydenlee8332]

as others have pointed out, this is mostly an ableist aspect of interviews. This will for sure weed out neurodivergent people even though they are very nice people and are amazing at what they do

[@notreallydavid]

Tesco, not Tesco's - I think they slam that into their staff during induction.

[@egx161]

It’s who you know. Many jobs are given to know people who are recommended or nepotism. Can you show up consistently and do the job. Small businesses want a tribe. LEGO people who look the same. And don’t forget the racism that exists in many industries. Thought; Two people are interviewing for the same job. Same qualifications. One white. One black or other minority. What happens in certain places?

[@kristiangustafson4130]

"Renegaded on his promises..." at 6:25. Do we mean "Reneged" ? Small point, I know, just this usage caught me out.

[@ThisisFerrariKhan]

Yeah it caught my ear as well. He meant reneged but used the wrong word

[@antonygibson4694]

Most company interviews these days are looking for a new drinking buddies for their 'organised forced fun' nights out. if you fit that criteria you will get the job

[@JoeSmith-jd5zg]

I got three out of my five career jobs WITHOUT an interview! Loved it!! I LOATHE INTERVIEWS!

[@entreprenr1476]

What was the hiring process then? They just gave you the job?

[@JoeSmith-jd5zg]

@@entreprenr1476 Yes. The first time the was after an internship and the organization found a spot and put me there. In the second case, that hiring official was in a different organization where we collaborated on projects, so he had seen me work for a couple years; I didn't even apply for that one, he just knew my abilities. The final one I did apply for, didn't hear anything for several months, then just got a congratulatory email from HR saying I got it. The manager hired based on my resume and letting a couple of experienced now coworkers review it too. They liked what they read and it turned out to be a great fit.

[@bebe8842]

Unfortunately, there are too few people who see the problems that we have and are forced to live with and think that this system is horrible. If the majority saw how corrupt, immoral and ineffective everything is, changes would happen sooner. but they either never happen, or they happen too late, namely, with the next generation, and the next one. It takes decades and centuries...

[@dhenderson1810]

I have always said that a system will never change because there are too many people making too much money or gaining too much benefit to ever change it.

[@shao2307]

The challenge is narrow predictive AI cannot predict for changes in new context. We built an AI that performed 6x better than recruiters and it made our clients a lot of money. Then the pandemic hit and the skills and personality needed to thrive in the new normal meant our old algorithm based on historic data didn't work so well. Oh and if you think AI is not already used for hiring decisions you're in for a big surprise.

[@Zack_Wester]

And theres fuides how to pass the ai already.

[@Locutus]

The business' name is Tesco, not Tescos.... The entire building is covered with its name.

[@dlbattle100]

User: I was just watching a youtube video and the speaker said something about Hitler "renegading on his promises" to Chamberlain. I don't think he meant renegading, what did he mean? ChatGPT said: It sounds like the speaker meant to say "reneging," not "renegading." "Reneging" means to go back on a promise, commitment, or agreement. In the context of Hitler and Chamberlain, the speaker likely referred to Hitler breaking the Munich Agreement or other diplomatic commitments he made prior to the outbreak of World War II. "Renegading" isn't a proper term for this context, but "reneging" would make sense when discussing someone failing to honor their word.

[@Mikewee777]

Interviews should only exist to confirm that the person who applied is actually a human citizen and not some foreign bot who spammed dishonest resume data through a DDOS attack into every network .

[@Zack_Wester]

and even then thats a shit matrix. at least what I hear from the US employers and HR peaple. because if you looking for a work and there is a question thats in the style of. are you A or B. if you answer B you will not go forward no matter what. why should I ever pick B that is a 100% fail rate. if I pick A thats still a high fail rate but its not 100% and I might be able to dodge the B for long enouth that it at the end dont matter.

[@Bbonno]

An interview definitely tests the candidates commitment to showing up😜

[@SpilledRooibos]

And so does the first day of real work...

[@roberthoople]

So, Kahneman did a better job of finding psychopaths who like to parade around in other people's underwear?

[@batyanko8283]

Of course you can test how a person can do their job. And an interview is exactly that kind of a test, for jobs that involve interacting with people (which is most if not all jobs). Of course, that alone will still be a pretty poor predictor for future performance, as it's just a small test, and it tests for very few things. For the rest of things, you have your statistical methods, which are great when you have quality data (which in my opinion you usually don't xD

[@mattrobert5]

Litter free roads? Its Woolwich, its practically made of litter

[@Will_Moffett]

I can make far better assessments than an algorithm. The problem is everyone thinks they are like me when they aren't. Also, one of the main points of a job interview is assessing whether or not you can stand to interact with the individual in question on a daily basis. No statistical algorithm can tell you that so job interviews aren't going anywhere.

[@nikicarrie4071]

Psss people lie 🙄

[@RipMinner]

Your just a different algorithm. You hire the people that tick off all your boxes just like a algorithm does.

[@Will_Moffett]

@@RipMinner Ok but my algorithm is better because it contextualizes way, way better.

[@icanhasutoobz]

"The problem is everyone thinks they are like me when they aren't." You seem to be demonstrating exactly the bias the video mentioned (The Illusion of Asymmetric Insight). This conceit is literally what it refers to. Also, even if it happens to be true of you personally (odds aren't in your favor), it doesn't change the fact that it does not seem to be true for average humans. And you can't be there in every hiring situation to wield your allegedly superior skills, so this offers no general solution at all. "Also, one of the main points of a job interview is assessing whether or not you can stand to interact with the individual in question on a daily basis." Not really. I understand that people do end up making it about that, but it's not supposed to be about your particular comfort with someone else _personally_ (this is about _professional_ context; your personal feeling don't really apply). If you can't just do your best to work with them whether or not you like them, perhaps *you* are the problem.

[@Will_Moffett]

@@icanhasutoobz That was kinda my point, that everyone thinks they are good judges of others. People tend to always think they are good prognosticators in most any area even against mounds of data indicating the contrary. You can go to any poker room in America and find 8 guys sitting around a poker table all thinking they have an edge on each other. People have super strong opinions on topics they know nothing about really. You can present a superior judge of a prospective hire but no one is ever going to think that software is better then them at that task. Therefore job interviews aren't going anywhere. Do you see millions of people using software to help them bet on sports? Nope. I'm sure some do. But the vast majority of people "know what they know". They think their gut is never wrong. As far as requiring a compatible personality of someone you have to interact with on a daily basis I'm sorry but I have to out you as someone who has never hired anyone. Maybe some technical person who only does certain things can be objectionable. But for most people you're going to need some baseline of compatibility. Otherwise all kinds of problems can emerge.

[@bobbarker1798]

One of the best ways to judge character is to watch how ppl treat those they consider to rank lower on the social scale.

[@iainmackenzieUK]

Thanks for this - as always, very engaging. As an international teacher of Physics for 30 years, may I ask if you would look at assumptions made and behaviours around teaching? I do feel its time for a paradigm shift!

[@DavidB.Fischer]

Interviews: Intuition ->All about ->personality and likability.

[@nco_gets_it]

I have interviewed many candidates for engineering roles. I use a skills matrix to guide the interview. A lot of information is actually present in the resumes as these are not entry level positions, but even an entry level candidate has past performance points to consider. My HR dept hates me and says my methods are "unfair". Too bad. We are not trying to make social progress--we are trying to make products that work and don't kill their users.

[@frankfahrenheit9537]

When I look at the Wikipedia article about the book "Talking to strangers" it looks as if it is not a very good book.

[@TheScience69]

I used to manage a tesco and had to do interviews. The whole process is SO stupid. Even the guy who trained me to do it didnt know why i had to ask half of the questions or how they helped determine the best person for the job. The question why do we ask thos was basically answered with because these are the questions we ask.

[@MTEmployment]

Thoughts on the value of interviews for jobs that are primarily verbally based such as sales or social work? If the job entails working in a factory floor well then an interview seems like a few tile activity however, if the job is primarily based on a person’s verbal skills, then wouldn’t having a conversation be the best way to determine a candidates viability?

[@fredmercury1314]

3:13 This was utterly pointless because grade predictions are not job interviews. That's like studying picking strawberries and comparing it to being a bus driver. The interview isn't to predict how good a candidate can do a job, it's to predict how well a candidate fit's into the company ethos and how well they'll fit into a role in an existing team. _A computer can't predict those things by looking at their high school grades._

[@olliestudio45]

.... aaand I'm not sure if this was mentioned but good coaching / prep and a bit of practice seem to be the way to go with interviews. i.e. Work out what the employer is looking for and play that character to perfection.

[@deshaebeasley]

I usually get the job if I can get the interview.

[@bigbarry8343]

how would you know hypothetical performance of candidates that have not been selected for the job? are you taking into account the candidates that have not taken up the offer? sounds more like a sales pitch for AI selection.

[@carultch]

Candidate uses AI to apply for the job. Employer uses AI to select the candidate. And the job market becomes an infinite loop of bots talking to bots.

[@markjones1337]

I wonder how long Tesco would continue trading if all the potential new recruits interviewed the company to gauge whether they wanted to work for tesco.

[@patrickday4206]

The point is for the people with abnormal circumstances that had a bad resume because 2 other jobs had a bad situation or the reverse resume looks spotless and an interview shows they don't really know much about that type of work.

[@zweer13]

Well the question is not closed. Once in place, which system is more vulnerable to cheating or duping. Maybe symplistic statistical approach has vulnerabilities.

[@robcarley7506]

It almost sounds like you're advocating to make it harder, its already a pain in the backside, lot more than it used to be, endless ghosting, rejection emails and phone calls. Its already at a stage where you could be a 70% match for a job and you're get rejected because the employer is to lazy to train you. This isnt the first version of this ive wrote out, the first was longer so in reality i have a LOT more to say on this but i cant see anyone reading an essay.

[@GeoFry3]

The military does 3 checks. 1. Credit check 2. Criminal check 3. IQ/skills assessment test Nothing more

[@chebrubin]

But what are the inputs for the candidate to feed into statistical analysis for a part-time supermarket employee? Thats why we fall back on the personal evaluation in the event we run into a potentialy good candidate for employment? Nevile Chamberlain was talking to a madman and a liar. For jobs like supermarket checkout arent we better at just measuring the candidates performance over 2 x 60 minute shifts with simulated customer experience not using real money?

[@SurmaSampo]

Good luck with that consisting they are likely to normally interview 30+ people to fill a couple of roles. That is 60 hours of simulated experience that has to be resourced and scheduled.

[@chebrubin]

@@SurmaSampo what data points would they use? Their high school report card???

[@SurmaSampo]

@@chebrubin Well there basically are none, hence why we have to fall back onto human qualitative analysis. Interview and reference checking are the best of bad options. Trying to optimise away uncertainty is just chasing diminishing returns. The primary purpose of leaders is to make decisions with limited information and uncertain outcomes.

[@byblispersephone2.094]

Simply put, we will never know other people fully or entirely. So interviews are here to stay because there isn’t a better option.

[@zitzong]

Are job interviews a tick box exercise?

[@phill6859]

I'm immune. I made sure my boss sat in with me, because i knew I'd be blamed

[@NEILANIL1]

Job interviews is more for the person applying for the job, but I'm not sure if employer benefit much. People tend to be on their best behavior.

[@steve5772]

My last two interviews were like "youve got half a clue, youre in, but we need to talk for 30 minutes" and "youve got 2 arms and legs, youre in, but lets have a chat anyway"

[@ViceCoin]

I get complimented on my interview performances by HR, but still don't get hired.

[@sharptoothtrex4486]

Since I am a special needs man, job interviews might not be exactly what I believe because it might be uncalled lies or anything bogus. If this includes night shift I cannot do, I explain rationally I cannot work night shifts because of my disability and problems.

[@KaiHenningsen]

I get the feeling that the main problem is that interviewers often learn "how to interview" stuff that is little more than a cargo cult, and doesn't help with the points of the interview - can the candidate do the job, and can we work with the candidate? All else is not useful.

[@melusine826]

7:52 soon as you say AI making decisions😬. They may be better predictions but...re biases in the algorithm 12:31 also didn't know kahneman was IDF. My own bias says that's also a concern

[@MatthewJBD]

Tesco* - I don't know why, but "Tescos" really bothers me.

[@BassHelal]

You're right it is Tesco. But British people really like to add that extra " 's" to places for some reason. I'm going to the doctor's. I'm in front of Marks and Spencer's. It really isn't correct but today's grammar mistakes are tomorrow's standard grammar. It's stupid but that's languages for you.

[@trickygoose2]

I would say that most people would say they were going to the "doctors" with no apostrophe. This is because they are going to a surgery with multiple doctors and there tends to be some uncertainty as to which one you will see.

[@georgesos]

​@@trickygoose2this doesn't apply in the UK, each person has a doctor assigned to him. and they use it as was said, for going to places.

[@dhenderson1810]

If the way of picking candidates that the video suggests, came in, there will no longer be a need for HR departments.

[@pandereodium]

So it's basically a sum of red and green flags that determines wether the applicant is suitable for a job or not, rather than applicant's personal charisma. Who would predict that...)

[@clivewi9103]

When you turn up for an interview and they ask you "why are you here", it's time to leave; on the second interview the manager can't be bothered to attend, clearly you are not getting the job, time to leave. What is the difference between a mean lean company and a Fat Flabby one; A Personnel department; I can explain further if you go to a mean lean company you will be interviewed by the CEO and they will talk about their company and vision, you can explain how you could fit it with the vision and contribute you the companies success, and you will get the position.

[@johnf4680]

Do a piece on performance management. That is also a waste of time.

[@hipidipi20157max]

Interviews are designed to intimidate or make a person feel bad. Especially when a very young person , mostly females, interviews an older person. When the owner or the potential boss interviews then all goes much better.

[@archonjubael]

Very fun take. And I learned something about the UK.

[@dhenderson1810]

The Chamberlain-Hitler meeting explains a lot. Hitler manipulated Chamberlain avd told him what he wanted to hear. Fact is, people get places in life by telling the other person what they want to hear. Flattery, offering what the other person wants, makes you look more favourable. So the people who usually get the jobs are those who manipulate and decieve best.

[@sigowla7489]

You drove into london for that? Nothing is worth entering that blite! I literally left my previous employer coz i hated going to london!

[@TheBestNameEverMade]

I don't really agree. I have candidates tell me they can't work certain hours which we need them to work. I have had them tell me they were let go from the last few job because they could not show up on time. I have had people interview because they are interested in one of our staff members. I have spoken to people who can barely speak English for a role where they need to. I have spoken to people who just have weird ticks that would impeded their conversations with customers. I think for certain jobs you can really weed out a percent of bad employees.

[@busterdafydd3096]

15:41 TL;DR;- double blind it also if you want to be really scientific you make someone who knows about the role really well or who would be the possible future co-workers to provide the statistics to measure the participants by and then you get someone very observant and really good listener (presumably HR) to do the test on the interviewee, creating a sort of double blind test. just to clarify though, the results that are returned to the people who created the test should be provided unlabelled data and if they correctly label the categories based on the scores of those categories it shows a system that understands the participants and the desires wanted from the participants.

[@donatodiniccolodibettobardi842]

Why do you sometimes add 's' at the end of the word Tesco?

[@chris7285]

I’ve quit jobs after passing the interview. They told me I was hired and were expecting me to show up for my first day. I never showed up. 😆😆 Actually, now that I’m on the subject. One time me and my best friend both both did the same thing for the same workplace as dishwashers. We never showed up for our first dishwasher shifts at the same workplace on the same day. They must’ve been PISSED 😤 😂😂😂 I don’t condone this behavior but this was back when we were 18 or 19. It hasn’t had any negative effects on my life. It was a lame Chinese Buffet job. The buffet doesn’t even exist anymore because it went out of business.

[@gabrieldurkin7366]

I’m not sure how much wisdom we should extract from Malcolm gladwell. And I wonder about the selection bias In all these experiments. These observational studies of soldiers in Kahnemann’s army or prisoners standing before judges are not randomized controlled tests. How do you define the counterfactuals, simulate the control group, properly assess the causal impact? And why was Chamberlain foolish not to threaten Hitler when he met him? You think it would have made one iota difference to Hitler’s plan? Believing Hitler could be negotiated with was too optimistic. More generally, believing that anything anyone might have said would have made a difference, including threats.

[@icanhasutoobz]

The scoring/ranking criteria are also unavoidably chosen by humans, and more importantly, scoring/ranking is _conducted_ by humans. Both of which leave ample room for the introduction of human biases, and the latter is ultimately subjective (regardless of how well justified for the context); at best, it's equivalent to "expert opinion", but given the context, I seriously doubt the people doing the scoring legitimately count as "experts" in any meaningful sense. It's not like scientific practice is free from human bias either. The choice to toss out "anomalous" data, for example, is a great place for selection bias to hide (not to mention the choice of experimental design in the first place). And scientists, no matter how well-meaning or conscientious, are still unavoidably human, and vulnerable to the same biases and subjectivity as anyone else.

[@dhenderson1810]

Yet Trump thinks he can negotiate with Putin.

[@cph1982]

Why do you add an 'S' on the end when you say "Tesco"?

[@suprfoodie]

is someone trying to replace recruiters ?

[@beastybaiter7378]

My team is currently interviewing for a new senior software dev. There are 3 of us on the panel, including me. The questions I ask are designed to determine knowledge and if they lied on their resume. We've ruled out a couple of candidates for lying and another for not having the knowledge their experience would suggest. And that's the problem with using an algorithm, it can't judge if an answer is honest or not. Beyond the liars, I think our conclusions mostly match what's on the resumes.

[@Volkbrecht]

But notice how you turned the premise of the video around. You are not looking for certain personal attributes, you are looking to exclude specific problems that you know how to identify. Which is how members or leaders of teams generally approach that task. HR professionals may think they can build an accurate image of an applicant, but then again, in a lot of small to midsize companies nobody really listens to them. I have never seen it happening at any of the employers I worked for.

[@user-gz4ve8mw9l]

People should stop lying and employers should start training anyone who shows up. That'll be the day...

[@beastybaiter7378]

@@Volkbrecht I work at a pretty big fortune 500 company (top 100 actually) and for IT, HR just tries to filter out the spam. They don't conduct any interviews and leave it to the hiring team instead.

[@beastybaiter7378]

@user-gz4ve8mw9l no kidding, I got started at a consulting company having never even heard of their specialty. They spent 3 months training me and then I made a boatload of money for them over the next 5 years. But most companies won't do that. In our current case, we do actually need someone senior to replace someone who retired a couple weeks ago. We toyed with the idea of training someone but we lack the capacity for that.

[@Primitarian]

Maybe we should reform the hiring process for democracy in the same way. Enough of these debates and interviews, just run some statistical algorithms and be done with it.

[@narrgamedesigner2747]

Id like to get passed interview stages and have a day on the job instead if they like your cv, especially if you have years of experience I think showing not telling would be more useful. You see them handle the office life and gow they interact with the team rather than sittinf siwn and talking sbout what you would you could just make up a story for the interviewer anyway.