My friends who cheated in interviews are getting promoted (2022)

Post by asimpletune » Wed, May 10, 2023, 2:12 PM UTC

tristor wrote: post #160

I'm probably going to get roasted for saying this, but this is completely unsurprising to me. When I was in college, folks from India and other low trust societies would mercilessly cheat on their projects and exams, blatantly helping one another on individual works, and the college knew about it and didn't care. When I had brought this up at one point, I was told by a professor that it was a cultural difference that…

Post by watwut » Wed, May 10, 2023, 2:13 PM UTC

hermannj314 wrote: post #153

knicholes wrote: post #129

If one considers Kant's categorical imperative, "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law," then also considers how they'd feel if they were go to visit a doctor who had cheated or is cheating, one certainly must draw the conclusion that cheating is indeed immoral and undesirable.

I'd rather my doctor look up an answer in a medical textbook rather than "not cheat" and allow me to die in adherence to the noble idea that only the ideas we can keep in our long-term memory are worthy.

Post by scarface74 » Wed, May 10, 2023, 2:15 PM UTC

shswkna wrote: post #79

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #2

Yes, it's fundamentally unfair to those interviewees who don't cheat. And the process is broken. However, the conclusion this person reaches - we must conduct these broken interviews in person so the cheaters can't cheat - is the wrong one. Look at it from the point of view of the hiring company now, not the interviewer. They got a person who was good enough (based on the merits of their actual work, not interview pe…

It seems those that have a fundamental problem with cheating are in the minority. Reading through the comments leaves me only sad. Based on how I believe the world works, and on larger patterns at play here, this general cultural trend (if this is in fact what it is) will backfire. If this is deemed culturally acceptable, and one extrapolates this pattern further, there is little deeper value that a culture has to of…

Post by euix » Wed, May 10, 2023, 2:17 PM UTC

clnq wrote: post #59

We all know that interviews can focus on knowledge not applicable to the job, leading to candidates excelling in interviews but failing at their job, or vice versa. I don't hold a firm ethical view on whether this justifies cheating in interviews. However, as noted on Blind, people do succeed in their roles after cheating. Some could even make the argument that those who deliver business value fulfil the primary expe…

Post by lnsru » Wed, May 10, 2023, 2:18 PM UTC

whitemary wrote: post #127

asimpletune wrote: post #115

Reading some of the comments in this thread I'm surprised. It seems that a substantial number of people think one of the following: a.) cheating on interviews is ok, because interviews don't reflect the actual job b.) this is acceptable because the promotion process is distinct from the interview process or c.) that the cheaters clearly are skilled after all because of all their success, as evidenced by being promote…

[flagged]