Just wait what happens when people start to deep fake virtual interviews.
The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
261–270 of 623 posts
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
This conversation is referring to a specific phenomenon that has become strongly noticeable in the last 5 years or so. That problems of nepotism, or cronyism have already existed to some extent, is another conversation. I also don't know why "merit" is in quotes. Hiring based on merit is going to be the main goal for companies that are not corrupt. Corruption should also be discouraged e.g. by stopping companies beco…
I know what the conversation is referring to, and my response is in regards to the naiveté demonstrated by responses like yours. The problems of today are different only in particular application, not in motivation or nature. "Merit" as I understand it—who can best perform the job—has almost never been the primary hiring characteristic. Companies are comprised of people and those people are almost always the ones mak…
> Companies are comprised of people and those people are almost always the ones making the ultimate decisions.
What would be an example of a company where “those people” (who comprise the company) are not making “the ultimate decisions”?
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#263I've been a hiring manager for remote positions for a long time. If your recruiting channels are good, most of your candidates are going to be honest and good intentioned. But interview enough people, and you'll start encountering people trying to abuse remote work. They're not interested in contributing to your company. They're only interested in collecting paychecks while they do as little work as possible for as l…
> or maybe they're just trying to travel the world and do a "four hour workweek" thing where they answer e-mails once a day and phone in a couple hours of work at key times during the week. I’ve seen it work exactly once. The guy was absolutely brilliant, however. And a great communicator. But everything had to be done asynchronously for the most part, except a few slots where he was guaranteed to have good network a…
I think the key thing here is that even though he was placing a burden on his employer and teammates, the arrangement was well understood by both parties, and the employer agreed to accept it.
If someone wants to do something non-traditional and not inform the company about it, then the onus is on the employee to make sure their "odd" work habits don't impact others negatively.
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#264I once had a company internal recruiter refuse to look at my portfolio[0], because “I probably faked it.”
That was sort of “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”
I realized that this entire industry, that I fell in love with, as an enthusiastic, idealistic, young man, had turned into a miasma.
At that point, I just gave up, looking.
That company folded, not long after. I feel as if there's a better-than-even chance that I could have made a real difference (but there’s also a better-than-even chance that I’m mistaken, and I just dodged a bullet. Having their internal recruiter deliver such a stunning insult does not speak well for their corporate culture).
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Always makes me wonder how many dysfunctional companies are out there letting deadbeat remote employees collect paychecks and do as little work as possible because nobody cares enough to press the issue. I'll take a stab at it, and predict... all of them. Or nearly so. There seems to be an ever-present fraction of employees at any large corporation that are essentially worthless. Just along for the ride, raking in…
In the software industry it should be pretty easy to track tickets someone is working on and compare that to how long similar tickets are completed by coworkers.
That would need a boss who knows how much work each ticket really entails.
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#266I've experienced the following hiring remotely: * A candidate who was caught lip syncing to someone talking in the room behind them. * A candidate who had air pods to listen to someone coaching them. * Plenty of candidates who just wont turn on the video no matter what. Remote interviewing has some bizarre drawbacks.
>A candidate who was caught lip syncing to someone talking in the room behind them
For those who haven't seen this before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47mfohGyeBg
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
Missed the quiting part. It doesn't really matter if it's a diff. It matters that it was a diff that the husband apparently thought pertinent enough to mention. If it plays any part in the decision, or can show that they preferred single people in the interview, then it could be basis for a law suit (whether it would win or go to settlement is a different issue).
Nothing in the letters even hints that it played a part of the decision-making process for hiring or firing. The husband also mentioned his hair was different and he now wears glasses. Does that mean corrective vision also played a part in the process?
If the manager mentioned it, then it very well could have. Even if just on a subconscious level. I don't see anything that shows an audit of their thought processes, so you can't rule that out.
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
This conversation is referring to a specific phenomenon that has become strongly noticeable in the last 5 years or so. That problems of nepotism, or cronyism have already existed to some extent, is another conversation. I also don't know why "merit" is in quotes. Hiring based on merit is going to be the main goal for companies that are not corrupt. Corruption should also be discouraged e.g. by stopping companies beco…
I know what the conversation is referring to, and my response is in regards to the naiveté demonstrated by responses like yours. The problems of today are different only in particular application, not in motivation or nature. "Merit" as I understand it—who can best perform the job—has almost never been the primary hiring characteristic. Companies are comprised of people and those people are almost always the ones mak…
> I know what the conversation is referring to, and my response is in regards to the naiveté demonstrated by responses like yours
Please read some autobiographies of people from diverse backgrounds trying to break into atypical careers, the topic of imposter syndrome and anxieties about wanting to be taken on one's own merits regularly features.
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
> tangible benefits to more diversity People say that a lot, and even say it's been researched, but outside of product focus groups, I've never seen the actually research that supports that claim.
> Profitability is, of course, necessary to keep any business alive, and studies show that racial, ethnic, and gender diversity contribute to business success. A McKinsey & Company study of 366 companies revealed a statistically significant connection between diversity and financial performance. The companies in the top quartile for gender diversity were 15% more likely to have financial returns that were above their…
Cynically, couldn't these results be due to lower average wages offered to women and minorities?
Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed
#270I've been a hiring manager for remote positions for a long time. If your recruiting channels are good, most of your candidates are going to be honest and good intentioned. But interview enough people, and you'll start encountering people trying to abuse remote work. They're not interested in contributing to your company. They're only interested in collecting paychecks while they do as little work as possible for as l…
> Always makes me wonder how many dysfunctional companies are out there letting deadbeat remote employees collect paychecks and do as little work as possible because nobody cares enough to press the issue.
There are corporations that over-hire and often provide no work at all for weeks or months, but they require that worker is always on stand-by in case there is a surge. I know full-time workers who throughout an entire year maybe done one or two small PR-s, but when suddenly there is an issue needing solving and product teams have full capacity, these people save the day. They are sometimes also utilised for pairing, when given product team members have no spare capacity. From someone not knowing this, they indeed may seem like deadbeat employees, but the key is - they have to be always available during work hours even if no one contacts them for weeks.