Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 86 posts

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#51

Post by toomim »

aemreunal wrote: post #33
fallingknife wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it doesn't work why ban it? All sorts of inane BS is allowed and ubiquitous in hiring. Why not IQ?

> If it doesn't work why ban it? Precisely because, as you said, "it doesn't work." There's not a good amount of evidence that IQ tests (which vary wildly, BTW) are a valid measure of cognitive ability or an indicator of aptitude toward a task (perhaps other than mental arithmetic or something). It only causes people who may be bad at rotating shapes in their mind or whatever to be discriminated against.

You might want to read up on general intelligence, which is the well-documented phenomena that your performance on tasks like rotating shapes in your mind correlates very strongly with other tasks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)

Look at the figures in the "Cognitive ability testing" section -- see how strong those correlations are across the disparate fields of Classics, Math, and Music!

In other words, there is a mountain of evidence that IQ tests correlate with an extraordinarily broad range of aptitudes in daily life, and especially with job performance. IQ is the single most important psychometric correlate with job performance and income of any out there; it's a much stronger signal than race, gender, birthplace, or personality for instance:

"Research indicates that tests of g are the best single predictors of job performance, with an average validity coefficient of .55 across several meta-analyses of studies based on supervisor ratings and job samples."

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#52

Post by boondaburrah »

Dharmat55 wrote: post #42
stadium wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does that mean they are racist too?? There's a lot more to diversity and civil rights than just race, although racism is very visible. > Seems to me that preventing IQ tests from being used as a criteria for positions requiring heavy analytical work is discrimination against individuals who can do well on IQ tests. Some people just aren't test takers. Anxiety, ADHD, neurodiversity in general for example. Or maybe t…

> Anxiety, ADHD, neurodiversity > non-native language. Blind If we're being brutally honest here, this makes the test a good filter if only for this reason. These are not advantageous traits. All else being equal, a sensible employer ought to prefer the candidate without these ... 'neurodivergences'. If diversity is such a boon for business, I'm sure the company next door with less discriminating recruitment policies…

Those non-advantageous traits may have no bearing on the ability to do the job though, only the ability to take the test. This is precisely why it's illegal.

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#53

Post by Gareth321 »

IQ tests are extremely common in Europe for any kind of skilled job. This makes sense, since IQ is by far the highest correlated attribute when it comes to performance. It’s also an excellent way to standardise applicant selection and avoid bias. It even works the other way, when someone too intelligent applies for a job which won’t keep them engaged and challenged. Statistically, such applicants leave rather quickly.

I’m surprised it’s not more common in the U.S.

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#54

Post by toomim »

paxys wrote: post #40
toomim wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren't filtering people based on MBTI. MBTI is quite commonly used to characterize what types of jobs an individual might take on. If you understand a person's personality, it gives you a way of imagining how you might work with them. It's also popularly used in romantic dating, for the same reason.

If you put "are you pregnant?" as a required field on a job application and then say "oh we were just using it to know to get you a gift!", you really think anyone is buying it?

Perhaps you've never interviewed someone.

I am an employer. When I interview job candidates, I ask them about their lives, about their day, where they grew up, and lots of questions because I am starting a relationship with them.

The interview is not just a place to filter employees. It's also where you begin a relationship with them. You are envisioning how you might employ them. What kind of work could they do? Could they work well with John and Alice? How does it feel to talk to them? Do they like it when I'm direct, or when I speak softly?

I'm sorry that you've had such a cynical view on hiring, but the reality is that, yes, employers do use MBTI to get a richer understanding of their candidates. Here are some additional examples for you: https://www.talentinsights.com/blog/using-myers-briggs-in-hi...

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#55

Post by fnordsensei »

jokethrowaway wrote: post #46
zeruch wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a long time hiring manager, I would never use an IQ test to determine feasibility. They simply (for the most part) confirm an aptitude for test taking, and for tech jobs I've never seen that as an intrinsic good. People usually can be evaluated on their analytic skills through other means that are more conversational and interrogatory, which in turn also assess soft-skills, which contrary to McNamara Fallacy adher…

You don't understand how IQ tests work. It's not measuring aptitude of test taking, it's measuring your ability to detect and apply patterns.

There seems to be a general assumption that the brain is a muscle. If you train a muscle, it’s going to get strong regardless of what you lift with it.

If you train yourself to get better at seeing patterns of dots in boxes, that doesn’t generalize nearly as well as a muscle does. It doesn’t make you a better chess player. There’s plenty of science to back this up.

At large, IQ tests in recruiting are training applicants to be good at IQ tests.

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#56

Post by floodyberry- »

eigenvalue wrote: post #5

Several big hedge funds require candidates to take the Wonderlic test ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_test ) which is essentially an IQ type test (it strongly correlates with “G”). Didn’t seem to be an issue though since pretty much any candidate that got to that stage was fairly book smart and could easily get a good enough score.

That situation should be added to the Wonderlic!

"When evaluating candidates who will be working with large amounts of money, should you give them the Not-IQ-but-we-all-know-that's-what-it-is test:

a) before you weed out the minorities, who by definition cannot be trusted around nor deserve large amounts of money

b) after you weed out the minorities, who by definition cannot be trusted around nor deserve large amounts of money

c) I find this question offensive and would like to out myself as either a minority, who by definition cannot be trusted around nor deserve large amounts of money, or a minority sympathizer

d) An IQ test is not needed because there are other, more legal, ways to weed out minorities, who by definition cannot be trusted around nor deserve large amounts of money"

d) is the trap choice, as the IQ test is entirely for the benefit of the candidate so they feel like they're part of the "exclusive club" of smart non-minorities who by definition can be trusted around and deserve large amounts of money. b) is then the obvious answer as there is no risk of a non-minority complaining because only an asshole would apply to work at a big hedge fund.

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#59

Post by ryanmcbride »

toomim wrote: post #54
paxys wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you put "are you pregnant?" as a required field on a job application and then say "oh we were just using it to know to get you a gift!", you really think anyone is buying it?

Perhaps you've never interviewed someone. I am an employer. When I interview job candidates, I ask them about their lives, about their day, where they grew up, and lots of questions because I am starting a relationship with them. The interview is not just a place to filter employees. It's also where you begin a relationship with them. You are envisioning how you might employ them. What kind of work could they do? Cou…

I would love if an interviewer asked for my meyer's briggs type because I'd know right away that the interview is a waste of time.

Re: San Francisco VC firm required job applicants to take online IQ test

#60

Post by threatofrain »

dragonwriter wrote: post #50

> The former is illegal under a 1971 Supreme Court ruling that decreed IQ tests and other tests unrelated to the job to violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 This is patently false, and in this context (flat out stating that a hiring practice is illegal) quite arguably libelous. The case in question: (1) Did not rule that IQ tests violate the Civil Rights Act, (2) Did not rule that tests unrelated to job functions vio…

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

Police departments have successfully sued for the use of IQ tests in their hiring practices.

Post reply on HN