To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews • Hacker News Board

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#111

Post by MetalGuru » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:46 AM UTC

tsimionescu wrote: post #90

core-questions wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've heard it so many times about people interviewing others, as "(s)he is smart, passed all test, but weird, I don't like to work with her/him". At this point, it is systemic discrimination. No, that's a misnomer. Systematic discrimination implies the system itself codifies this behaviour - but instead, what is codified is _team fit_, which is often based heavily on intuition. Humans are capable of being good judg…

You're discussing from a position that puts team efficiency (and company efficiency) above any other value. You may in fact be right that certain kinds of diversity can hurt team efficiency (for an obvious example, if you already have a team of white power types, hiring a black man on that mteam will lead to morale issues). However, in practice, and especially for large companies, optimizing only for efficiency is si…

I’m genuinely curious, why is it a company’s responsibility (in a capitalist society) to hire someone less efficient? I agree that work is fundamentally important, but how is this not the government’s responsibility like any other welfare effort? Also, are you claiming that employment is an undeniable human right like free speech or protection from harm? And if so, what happens if there’s something like another Great Depression? (For the record, I agree that neurodiverse groups should be protected like other disadvantaged groups. I also think that they have less spotlight and protections than other disadvantaged groups despite having what’s arguably more disadvantage)

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#112

Post by arthens » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:49 AM UTC

tzs wrote: post #30

pwim wrote: post #15

Any hiring process will by definition favour certain kinds of candidates at the expense of others. Having a week long paid trial is a great way for the company to be less conservative about who they try out, but will also mean they’ll miss out on candidates who are already employed and unwilling to take time off or quit their job to participate in it. In the end though, if they can tap into an undervalued candidate p…

In this case, the week long paid trial is work from home, and I did not notice anything that said that the work had to be done during normal businesses hours. It should be possible for most people to fit that in around their current employment.

> I did not notice anything that said that the work had to be done during normal businesses hours

It doesn't seem an unreasonable assumption.

Having them work outside of business hours (isolated, no real time communication) on an standalone project (because self-onboard on a large and complicated project isn't reasonable) wouldn't really be a representative test of if they can work in a team and on a real project. At that point you are really just paying to solve a larger coding test.

> It should be possible for most people to fit that in around their current employment.

I highly doubt that most people would be able to fit ~40 hours of work on top of their normal work schedule. I'm single and have no particular obbligations, and I would still struggle. No way a parent of a young child or someone who has a dependant parent/relative would be able to fix that much amount of work in their schedule.

And even if someone manages to do 2 full time jobs for a week, would their output really be representative of their skills? I certainly wouldn't want to be judged on the quality/quantity of my output when working late nights after 8 hours in the office.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#113

Post by eru » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:51 AM UTC

stared wrote: post #7

As an Aspie/ADD, I have never passed any formal interview, even for an intern position (sic!). (You can compare and contrast it with my GitHub/Resume/blog to make a judgment.) Fortunately, many times (even for mid-size companies or research institutes) the hiring was less formal. For small startups, where it is informal, I didn't feel at a disadvantage. For big, I don't believe I can pass through the first filter. It…

> Moreover, many symptoms od ADD are taken for laziness, sloppiness, or lack of motivation. Many symptoms of Aspie are taken for rudeness, ill intentions or trying to dominate (breaking a social rule => (s)he thinks (s)he is above it).

To make matters even more complicated, in just the right dosage those faux pas can actually serve as countersignalling, and increase your perceived worth.

I'm speaking from experience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersignaling

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#114

Post by romwell » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:52 AM UTC

Leherenn wrote: post #94

icotyl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the opposite experience. I don't have Asperger's or ADD, but I'm shy and struggle with eye contact and small talk. I interviewed at about ten startups, and despite doing well on the technical questions, I got rejected every time. I began to suspect it was because of "culture fit" -- will this 35 year old introvert fit in at our frat house/office? I was getting pretty depressed after all that rejection, but I go…

I don't really understand this dismissing about "culture fit". You describe it yourself as a frat house, which, I assume from the rest of your post, is not what you want. Work is not always only about output and skills, especially in a small company run by 20-something whose only social life is their colleagues. It says nothing about your skills, just that both sides would probably be miserable in case you were hired…

>I don't really understand this dismissing about "culture fit"

You should understand that what you wrote sounds like discrimination by age (and sex, "frat" means male), which is illegal - and for good reasons.

EDIT: specifically, the only way a 35-year-old is not a "culture fit" in "a small company run by 20-something whose only social life is their colleagues" is if that company is discriminating by age. I don't have better words to explain that being 20 is not "culture".

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#115

Post by K0SM0S » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:52 AM UTC

shantly wrote: post #95

K0SM0S wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aha... so you know. Hopefully my long piece will be useful to someone else, then. "Red flag", that's the expression I was looking for indeed.

Yeah, sorry, didn't mean to dismiss your post with such a short response. It does give good insight into the Hiring Mind, for those who may not have been there.

It's fine, don't apologize. I didn't take it as a dismissal, and I was the one to offer entirely unsollicited advice. No worries, and I do appreciate your replies!

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#116

Post by eru » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:55 AM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #26

stared wrote: post #7

As an Aspie/ADD, I have never passed any formal interview, even for an intern position (sic!). (You can compare and contrast it with my GitHub/Resume/blog to make a judgment.) Fortunately, many times (even for mid-size companies or research institutes) the hiring was less formal. For small startups, where it is informal, I didn't feel at a disadvantage. For big, I don't believe I can pass through the first filter. It…

At my startup we did a round of "come in for an interview, pass FizzBuzz on a whiteboard, if you passed FizzBuzz you can come back for a 4 hour trial where you solve a small task representative of normal work in our normal work environment". We only hired students for 10-20 hours per week, so fairly low risk for both sides. My main takeaway from that was that the actual talking was close to useless for judging candid…

Yes! You aren't the first to make that observation.

Compare https://sockpuppet.org/blog/2015/03/06/the-hiring-post/

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#117

Post by eru » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:57 AM UTC

shantly wrote: post #6

> Terms like these – or interview questions such as ‘where you see yourself in five years’ – can be too general for people with autism, as many with the condition can find vague questions particularly hard to decipher. Pretty sure it's not just autistic folks who have to have prepped & memorized some bullshit in advance to have any kind of "acceptable" answer to those sorts of questions. Not to take away from the bro…

> Pretty sure it's not just autistic folks who have to have prepped & memorized some bullshit in advance to have any kind of "acceptable" answer to those sorts of questions. Not to take away from the broader point of the article nor what this company's doing.

Yes, normal-ish people have an easier time coming up with acceptable answers on the spot. But everyone benefits from prep.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#118

Post by icotyl » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 7:01 AM UTC

zestyping wrote: post #91

Pet peeve: there is no such thing as a "neurodiverse person". Individual people cannot be more diverse or less diverse than others. Diversity is a property of a group.

The article never refers to a "neurodiverse person". It does refer to groups: neurodiverse workers, neurodiverse employees, neurodiverse staff, neurodiverse colleagues, and neurodiverse voices. But not "neurodiverse person."

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#119

Post by MetalGuru » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 7:01 AM UTC

karmakaze wrote: post #42

core-questions wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've heard it so many times about people interviewing others, as "(s)he is smart, passed all test, but weird, I don't like to work with her/him". At this point, it is systemic discrimination. No, that's a misnomer. Systematic discrimination implies the system itself codifies this behaviour - but instead, what is codified is _team fit_, which is often based heavily on intuition. Humans are capable of being good judg…

How is "team fit" different from "culture fit" which basically means acts/talks/works "like me" and without explicitness can produce a discriminatory monoculture?

Selecting for culture fit isn’t always bad. You could be selecting for good cultural values the company has.

Re: To hire neurodiverse workers, one firm got rid of job interviews

#120

Post by gliboc » Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 7:02 AM UTC

h0l0cube wrote: post #85

core-questions wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> animal-brain genetic instincts You're discounting intuition with this dismissive label. Trusting the instincts of your team to make decisions on who they can work with is critical to maintaining cohesion on that team and keeping people happy, which is a critical competitive advantage (especially during any kind of downturn). We're not talking about "low mediocre", "animal-brain" people, we're talking about professi…

> and not actually providing any kind of evidence You might want to live up to your own standards. Looking at your posts so far, you point to no evidence that hiring 'based on intuition' (for whatever that means) ends in positive outcomes for either group cohesion, or even that fuzzy end-goal: productivity.

You're going full circle here. He's not the one advocating for "modern evidence-based research and training", so it's not in his standards. And I'm not blaming him. Not everything is measurable, or at least measurable in ways that would enable researchers to extract meaningful answers or techniques. You said it yourself, productivity is a fuzzy end-goal.

If you do not believe it is possible to empirically derive a way to interview properly, then rationalism is your best choice, i.e. Intuition/Deduction. And contrary to common belief, rationalism is not a prison. It's just a decision process, in which you're perfectly allowed to question yourself using available empiric data.