What was the test, out of curiosity? What tests are the most commonly given?
He got 1%, we can't hire him
41–50 of 594 posts
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#42Where do you work that psychometric tests are required of candidates? It's the first I've heard of something like this (outside of various gov't/military jobs).
Here in the UK, it's not uncommon in large companies.
It's common with big companies in South Africa as well. It may have to do with how difficult it is to fire someone under our laws, but a few months probation is usually good enough, and fairer.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
it would explain why Europe lags so far behind the US in tech startups The primary reason Europe lags behind is the substantial lack of investors & VC's. The case highlighted by the author is typical of large corporates but if you look at any decent tech company in London for example, this case would sound ridiculous and extreme.
Agree with the first bit. Doubtful about the second bit - beaurocracy seems to become magnified in London.
Magnified in large London corporates yes but there are only a tiny percentage of 'decent tech companies' that fit that criteria.
I was referring to the likes of Facebook UK, Google, Badoo, Songkick, etc.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#44I don't get it -- was this at an operating company hiring people, or at the author's recruiting company (which seems to be a depressingly common way to hire people in Europe)? If a recruiting company is so incompetent as to require personality profiling, and worse, enforce it so rigidly, it would explain why Europe lags so far behind the US in tech startups, despite having at least as many (if not substantially more)…
I was interested in applying for a job here in Norway, but it turned out the company had 2-3+ interviews (which would mean spending the day at their offices) over several months, as well as some sort of IQ test and other things. That was in the spring and they expected to have picked out some people by the end of summer. I didn't apply, mostly because I am happy where I am, but also because a 3-5 month interview proc…
>Is this a common practice?
No, a 3-5 month interview process is not common.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#45I don't get it -- was this at an operating company hiring people, or at the author's recruiting company (which seems to be a depressingly common way to hire people in Europe)? If a recruiting company is so incompetent as to require personality profiling, and worse, enforce it so rigidly, it would explain why Europe lags so far behind the US in tech startups, despite having at least as many (if not substantially more)…
it would explain why Europe lags so far behind the US in tech startups The primary reason Europe lags behind is the substantial lack of investors & VC's. The case highlighted by the author is typical of large corporates but if you look at any decent tech company in London for example, this case would sound ridiculous and extreme.
It's not the lack of invetors and VCs in Europe - it is the lack of ability to invest in RISKY companies - the very definition of "startup".
European investors are just bankers (with a few exceptions).
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#46Is "me and X" as the subject of a sentence valid British English grammar? It comes across as really uneducated.
It's normal, yes. Growing up in NZ we were taught that it's impolite and you should always say "X and I." I was surprised to learn that in the UK it's said the other way around.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently spent a year working for an "elite" Silicon Valley startup company. The VP engineering had read enough Joel Spolsky to get through the door.. but he didn't practice software literacy. I would love to work for a shop, even in an underling capacity, that really gets software dev right. It would be worth delaying my startup dreams just so I can do it right at scale.
Count the number of people in senior mgmt and in all positions who can do fizzbuzz. Greater than 50% in all cases - great. Greater than 50 % for all but less than 20% in senior positions - get out. Anything less - run for the hills. It's not saying its important - everyone in Hollywood says the story is the thing - but only Pixar seems to live by it. See any talk by Ed Catmull
Why do people say "doing fizzbuzz" rather than just programming? Fizzbuzz is just a trick question to see if new programmers know how to use the modulo operator or not.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#48I don't get it -- was this at an operating company hiring people, or at the author's recruiting company (which seems to be a depressingly common way to hire people in Europe)? If a recruiting company is so incompetent as to require personality profiling, and worse, enforce it so rigidly, it would explain why Europe lags so far behind the US in tech startups, despite having at least as many (if not substantially more)…
I was interested in applying for a job here in Norway, but it turned out the company had 2-3+ interviews (which would mean spending the day at their offices) over several months, as well as some sort of IQ test and other things. That was in the spring and they expected to have picked out some people by the end of summer. I didn't apply, mostly because I am happy where I am, but also because a 3-5 month interview proc…
> Is this a common practice?
Yes. Looks like 3 Interviews, 3-5 months of interview process is pretty normal in Europe. I have applied for a job in Norway as well once.
> I can understand if you have another job and end up interviewing somewhere else while working, but if I was without a job I probably wouldn't be able to wait 5 months for someone to decide I've passed their tests.
Well there is another common practice that if you are unemployed without a serious reason (freelancing, relocation, family matters etc.) you are turned down immediately by a logic "If he couldn't get a job, something must be wrong with him". That's even worse if you were unemployed for a prolonged period of time.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#49What was the test, out of curiosity? What tests are the most commonly given?
There were two tests - I don't know the names but maybe someone here knows more than I do about them.
Firstly: You had to write a personal statement, something to describe yourself
Test 1: Involved ticking (agreeing) with a list of statements from two perspectives. The first perspective was how you see yourself. The second perspective was how (you think) others see you
Test 2: Involved rotating the letter R many times in a fixed time period. I was given a grid of about 100 R's all at different angles and had to count the number of clock wise rotations for it to be normal.
The end-result was basically a bunch of weightings that gave personality traits. Followed by a really well written auto-generated description of that individuals traits.
Typically when people had the chance to read their results, they'd say "ooh, actually I agree". But of all the things it said - there was a hell-of-a-lot that it didn't say.
Re: He got 1%, we can't hire him
#50Is "me and X" as the subject of a sentence valid British English grammar? It comes across as really uneducated.
It's not really valid, but it's not uncommon either. It's something that would sound unremarkable in speech but looks quite bad when written down.