note: hunting cloud Google hr operations, senior vice President Laszlo burke (Laszlo Bock) was published in this month’s new book, “the Work Rules!” Google company is introduced in the talent recruitment methods and tips.
, he thinks, at present most of the interviews are a waste of time, because 99.4% of the time is in the first 10 seconds time is used to verify applicant impressed interviewers are accurate. Google for this internal developed an internal tool, called qDroid through structured content to help the interviewer choice position, put forward the appropriate interview questions. At the same time, Google also introduced “across departments the interviewer,” avoid “blinded” error occurred because the interest relations, were also more likely to focus on the quality of the applicant.
the following content by wired magazine excerpts from their part, tencent’s translation of science and technology are as follows:
“for the first impression, you never have a second chance.” This is an AD head & shoulders shampoo in the 80 s. For most of the interview. Has many professionals has been introduced, the interview of “first” 5 minutes will be what kind of effect. In the five minutes, the interviewer will make a preliminary evaluation, while the rest of the time just to verify such judgments. If they like you, they’ll find more reasons to strengthen such a good impression. And if they don’t like the way you introduce yourself, and then ended interview is, in fact, they thought in the remaining time is how to turn you down. In short, the interviewer in a short period of observation time made an important decision, this is called the “for”.
two psychology student at the university of Toledo, LeiQianYa, niche, (Tricia Prickett) and with da, Jane (Neha Gada – Jain) with their professor Frank bernini (Frank Bernieri) conducted a study in 2000. Study conclusion shows that the interviewer first 10 seconds of judgment result can be used to predict the next interview.
however, the problem is that this comes from the original 10 seconds judgment usually and meaningless.
according to their research, we more just confirmed to applicant during the interview process, rather than to evaluate them. Psychologists pointed out that human beings have such a tendency, namely, to find, express or strengthen information, to confirm their ideas or hypotheses. Through the simplest interaction, we can make automatic judgment, and this kind of judgment is easily influenced by some stereotypes. Although didn’t realize this, but we will still from evaluation of the applicant to subsequent behavior to find evidence to prove our first impression.
in other words, most of the interview is just a waste of time, because 99.4% of the time is in the first 10 seconds time is used to verify applicant impressed interviewers are accurate. Interview some of the problems, such as “talk to yourself”, “what is your greatest weakness”, and “what is your greatest strength”, is meaningless.
many company specially prepared the interview subject also has no value. Some of the topics include: “your clients is a paper maker, is considering building a second factory, so whether they should be doing it”, “please estimate how many gas stations in Manhattan”, and the most annoying, “how many golf balls to fill a Boeing 747 aircraft”.
answers to these questions can only reflect a scattered ability, and these abilities can be improved in the later practice, it is not necessary to use these skills to judge candidates. Worst of all, the interviewer often can only use the interview process of scattered information to make evaluation. In fact, do a lot of time in order to make the interviewer feel smart and self-gratification, but they don’t have the ability to predict the applicant will have what kind of performance in the future work.
need to disclose a message: I’m Google operations, senior vice President of human resources, some of the interview questions Google will be adopted, and I believe the future will also continue to use. I am sorry. We will do everything possible to downplay the problems. When executives, including myself, evaluating candidates per week, we will ignore the answers to these questions.
more structured interview can find talent
in 1998, Frank Schmidt (Frank Schmidt) and John hunt (John Hunter) has released a summary analysis of the data in the past 85 years, the study of the initial evaluation can predict future performance. They focus on the 19 kinds of different ways of evaluation, and found that usually, unstructured interview is often difficult to predict the applicant after induction.
unstructured interview can predict 14% of the employees’ future performance, this just higher than the recommended to investigate to others (7%), and the working life of data (3%). The best way to predict the applicant future job performance is work sample tests (29%). In this method of interview, applicants are given some sample work, the work is similar to the work after their entry, and the interviewer need to see when they are engaged in the work performance. However, even this way cannot perfectly predict a future performance, because it also depends on some other skills, such as the ability to cooperate with colleagues, how to deal with uncertainty, as well as the ability to learn and so on.
what’s worse, it is difficult to extracted from many specific work position to the typical samples, which presented to applicants. For call center position, or any other task oriented position, you can and should let applicants accepted work sample tests. But for many other jobs, variable factors in the work of too much, so it is hard to find a representative sample. All of our technical post recruitment, both engineers and product managers, all need to accept some form of work sample tests, and the applicant will usually be required to solve some engineering problems.
suboptimal predictor is general cognitive ability test (26%). Different from common interview questions, the test answers has a clear right or wrong, similar to normal IQ test. General cognitive ability test can measure the candidate’s ability to learn. And if have good intelligence and ability to learn at the same time, so most people can succeed in most of the work. But the problem is that most such standardized tests are discrimination against men were not white, not (at least in the United States). The SAT, for example, has been unable to predict very well among women and white students in the university. The reasons include the test form (pre-university there is no gender difference in the test, the title of this test is mainly short-answer questions and answers questions, rather than multiple-choice), test scores (after removal of a possible answer, men are more likely to guess the answers, which will be conducive to their scores), even content.
with general cognitive ability tests in parallel is structured interview (26%). In this method of interview, applicants will be asked a series of problems in advance, and has a clear answer the problems of evaluation standard. The structured interview is divided into two kinds: based on past behavior and based on the assumption of the scene. Interview method based on past behavior will ask candidates describe after the success, and explain how these results corresponding to the applying for a job. And the interview method based on hypothesis scenarios will work-related what-if scenarios are put forward. Skilled interviewer can in-depth analysis reflect the honesty of the candidates and thinking process.
even for unstructured job, structured interview method has good prediction ability. We also found that this method of interview can bring both the interviewee and the interviewer better experience, but also the most fair. So, why aren’t more companies use this way? This is due to design the interview is very difficult that you need to create and test the interview subject, to ensure that the questions related to the applicant. Then you also need to subject to regular updates, in order to avoid later applicants know in advance the topic and make preparation. This is a huge project, but other interview method in fact is a waste of everyone’s time, the interview or too subjective, or prone to bias.
in fact, we have a better way of the interview. Research shows that the multiple evaluation methods together better than a single evaluation way. For example, the general cognitive ability test and responsibility evaluation together, we can better predict who is more qualified for a position. My experience is that in scored higher on tests of the sense of responsibility of the applicant has a better ability to work. In other words, they will not give up, in work and more responsible to the team and the surrounding environment.
we predict is the purpose of the interview candidates will have what kind of performance after induction. In order to achieve this goal, we have a more scientific approach: based on past behavior and what-if scenarios of structured interview and cognitive evaluation, the sense of responsibility and leadership testing together. In order to help the interviewer, we developed a called qDroid internal tools. By the tool, the interviewer can choose a position, understand the ability of this position needs to be tested, then via E-mail an interview on topics related to contain guidelines. This interview official then help them to find the most suitable interview questions. The interviewer can also share documents with the rest of the interview team, through the cooperation of all, aspects of the candidate’s ability to evaluate.
the idea is that, despite the interviewer can choose according to individual willingness to their own problems, but through the specialized design, the interviewer’s job will be simplified, and we also can make the interview better and more reliable.
some typical interview questions include:
– tell me a time you had a positive impact on team behavior. (the subsequent problems include: : what’s your main goal is? Why do you do? Your team members have any response? Then what is your plan?
– tell me a time you promote effective team goals. What is your method? (then questions include: what are your goals? As an individual and team, how to realize the goals you? How do you make your own leadership ability to adapt to each team members? What did you get from the experience of key experience?)
– tell me once you are in the difficulties encountered in the process of cooperation with others. (this can be the colleagues, students and clients. Why do you find it hard to work with him? (subsequent questions include: what did you take a way to solve the problem? Final results? What else can you have a different way?
answers to common problems make beautiful
when the book was a draft, one early reader once said to me: “these questions are broadly, some disappointing.” That is right and wrong. Yes, these problems are very common, but what really matters is how to answer. These problems provides you with a solid foundation, from many good candidates to help you find the best man for the job. The applicants have better case and reason to make their choice. You can clearly see the gap between elite and ordinary.
it is true that some interview questions are interesting, such as “which song can best describe your work ethic”, and “when you have a man in the car when what would you want to”. These are all from other company human resources department real interview questions. However, the main points of the interview is to find the most suitable for the person for a job, rather than ask some issues which may cause you have tendentiousness. (for example, you might think, I a person in the car will also be thinking the same thing!)
then, we will adopt a consistent rule to go for an interview. For general cognitive ability tests, our scores standards include five aspects, the first point is how candidates ability to understand the problem.
for each aspect, the interviewer needs to be pointed out that the candidate’s performance, and each score level has a clear definition. The interviewer need detailed evaluation, the applicant’s performance in general cognitive ability tests, this will help to evaluate staff then make their own evaluation.
after heard our interview questions and playing table, a skeptical friend blurt out: “this is just some of the cliches and corporate newspeak.” However, please remember you for the same position last five candidate interviewed. You offered them the same question or different? If you every aspects necessary to everyone, or whether you finished the interview time? If you insist on using the same standard to judge everyone, or due to fatigue or bad mood and attitude to an applicant is particularly demanding? If you write a detailed report, make the other interviewers can also use your information?
smart recruitment rules can solve all these problems, help you from chaos, empty and complex work in the scene to extract measurable and comparable results. For example, imagine you are a technical support for recruiting. “For” confirm solutions of problems, a good answer: “my way to repair the laptop batteries according to customer requirements.” The best answer is: “because he had to complain about the the battery life, at the same time is on a business trip, so I solved the problem for him. In addition if he needs, I also prepared the spare battery for him.” Using the seemingly boring job rules from the chaos of the content of the key to find valuable information.
in addition also need to remember that your purpose is not only evaluation of the applicant, will you still hope they fall in love with the company. You want them to get good experience, their concern is solved, and has a very good feeling when they leave. The interview process may be awkward, because you need to close dialogue with had just met someone, and at a very vulnerable position. You it’s worth taking the time to make sure they feel good at the end of the interview, because they can tell the others experience, and this is the correct way to treat people.
in the past, everyone in silicon valley had the bitter experience of a Google interview, and at present, in an interview for Google declined after the crowd, 80% said they would recommend friends to apply for the position of Google. Considering themselves and failed to induction, this is a very high proportion.
don’t leave job interview with the boss
in the process of me to go to other company, I have seen the future of the boss and some colleagues, but rarely seen will work for my subordinates. Google changed this pattern. nullnullnullnullnullnullnullnullnullnull