Take a look at HBS’s Working Knowledge, Hiring for Executive Intelligence. Some quotes that rocked my world: IQ test questions don’t assess the practical, on-your-feet thinking skills needed in business. What’s more, these tests have been repeatedly accused of racial and gender bias. Yet, despite these very real shortcomings, IQ tests are still a better predictor […]
Because the cost of a bad hire is so high, some organizations are resorting to a variety of psychometric tests to determine if it’s worth interviewing and possibly hiring a candidate. If you, like me, are suspicious of tests, take a look at The Einstein-Clavin Effect by Wendell Williams. My favorite quote: … controlled research
I had dinner recently with someone who said, “We put our candidates through the wringer. First we test them, then we interview them, then we give them another test.” I spoke with someone else whose manager wants an extensive role play to pit candidates against each other (sounds a little like The Apprentice to me).
Shawn Taylor, in his article Mismatching workers, jobs a costly mistake, (free registration required) has an astounding US statistic: employers lose a total of $105 billion a year by failing to recognize the talent that’s in front of their face. That’s a lot of money. Taylor’s article goes on to discuss the usage of tests
John Kador, who’s written a number of books about interviewing and a new one coming out, has an article about brainteaser and riddle interviews on Darwin. Kador gives pointers on how to answer the questions, and if you’re a candidate, you should read his suggestions. They will help you in the interview. I have a
I had a heated discussion last week with a hiring manager. He was convinced games and puzzles helped him discriminate between suitable and unsuitable candidates. I told him I’d probably fail the games he had for project managers. “Uh, what do you mean the games for project managers?” “Don’t you have separate games or puzzles