Most striking to me is how impossible such a direct conversation would be in this day and age. In a similar situation the manager would be pretty worried about HR/litigation possibilities.
Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
161–170 of 276 posts
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, he's definitely talking about SALES people, who use their sales tactics to sell him on themselves. Definitely not talking about "book smarts" brilliance. The author probably intentionally mistitled the story for attention. That said, there's a good lesson - if you hire sales people, their most attractive target will always be selling themselves to the guy who's writing their paycheck. It will not automaticall…
The weird thing is, why didn't he hire this person in a way that posed less risk to his business? Why is he handing over a gigantic check worth 140,000 of today's dollars? Isn't this person crazy, or at least a terrible businessman? Yet here we all are, listening to his advice. The longer I think about this the more I dislike it.
Exactly. The lesson isn't to not hire brilliant or average people, but to trial people more gradually. The made up story also attempts to draw a conclusion from an anecdotal level of "evidence." Doesn't seem to stick for some reason.
Risk reductions can be:
- invite people over to hang out, hack on something, or work on whatever they're working on
- start people on a contract gig
- maybe another contract or what works for them
- have an extremely informal non-interview, interview process
- trial period
- eventually FTE status in a set time-frame if both sides want itRe: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#163If you include Sir Isaac Newton in a case against employing geniuses, your case is pretty thin.
Why? From all I have read about Newton, he would have been the employee from hell. A genius as a mathematician and physicist, yes; but a terrible employee.
He provides Newton as an example of the kind of non genius he would employ. Learn to read.
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, If I repeatedly get fucked up and crash Fords over the course of my life while having much better luck with other cars, I might start looking for a causal relationship.
Exactly: that's what the author of the piece is doing. He's had bad luck with a certain type of person while having much better luck with other types of people, and he's analyzing the reasons for that.
Sounds like a rationalization for a gap in management capabilities. Much easier to find fault in tall people or people that talk fast.
An insightful business owner will review their own psychology first and ask others for their impression in a way that doesn't reveal their bias.
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#165"But the point I have in mind is this: Business and life are built upon successful mediocrity; and victory comes to companies, not through the employment of brilliant men, but through knowing how to get the most out of ordinary folks."
At a high level, I believe that's the essence of the story (whether is real or made-up).
Today, in a globalized world economy with saturated markets, we are lured into thinking that "the great next thing" will be a product of "brilliance". I think this is a good reminder that it's not. That in fact, on average, sustainable success is a product of a life's work and dedication to a purpose. That in fact, the Jobs, the Zuckerbergs and the Gates of the world are merely outliers and that we should look beyond the expectation of immediate and flamboyant returns.
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#166It appears that men labeled as genius were simply men of high charisma capable of convincing and inspiring others.
And since those qualities are so out of reach for techies they're looked down on.
There are plenty of techies with social skills.
'sama ! :)
It must suck to be a techy and have social skills because you'll get pegged as a business gal/guy even if you can hack with the best of em. Most people can't seem to handle the doublethink of two seemingly contradictory capabilities in one person. They need to find a simple job to reduce you to.
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#167> But if you blunder for words, punctuate incorrectly, spell incorrectly, and express yourself clumsily, I'm sure to believe you mind is cluttered and ill-disciplined.
I write and speak pretty well, but am still ill-disciplined as anything.
> You conceive a big idea, get the whole organization on tiptoes to carry it out, and then you lose interest and go off on a new tangent.
Now that's me.
> You are always living, in imagination, about six jumps ahead.
Now that's definitely me.
> Their active minds can always see two sides to every question; and they stand still while the debate goes on inside.
Now that's definitely me.
> Does he finish what he starts? Geniuses almost never do.
Good news, I am a genius.
Moral: In an ideal world I will never get hired or get success in business. Hell I am doomed for sure.
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#168As mathattack has correctly pointed out in a comment an hour ago, this is a parable (a made-up story). The huge salary by that day's standards should make that clear. But the unnamed author makes his hiring methods look stupid, because he should be doing a work-sample test[1] before hiring for such an expensive contract. If he doesn't know what the worker will actually do, he shouldn't put so much money on the line.…
There's a lot of things people should have been doing in 1924, but weren't. I mean, if we're judging by modern standards, allowing women and minorities into senior roles would be one of them. How, exactly, do you do a work-sample test for a chief sales executive anyway? "Hey, can you run our global sales division for a couple of hours, then we can evaluate if your methods really bring in the sales"? Edit: to clarify…
Hell for a sales position merely the relationships they have from their old jobs would be more valuable than any work-test they could ever complete.
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
And since those qualities are so out of reach for techies they're looked down on.
I think everyone should be highly suspicious of charisma. Charisma is a skill, not a trait, and it's developed by spending a lifetime practicing on people that one thinks are largely beneath one's self.
Skill of kings.
Re: Why I Never Hire Brilliant Men (1924)
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think everyone should be highly suspicious of charisma. Charisma is a skill, not a trait, and it's developed by spending a lifetime practicing on people that one thinks are largely beneath one's self.
Skill of kings.
If you were detached enough to think of it as a game, it might even be called a... game of thrones.