Only high performers pass this kind of job interview | Tyler Cowen
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 янв 2023
- Here’s what job interviewers are testing you for, according to economist Tyler Cowen.
Subscribe to Big Think on RUclips ► / @bigthink
Up next, ‘The Art of War’: The greatest strategy book ever written ► • ‘The Art of War’: The ...
Economist Tyler Cowen argues that traditional interview methods are not effective in identifying the best candidates for a job, especially in creative roles. Candidates who are well-prepared often pass these interviews, but this only tests their preparation and not their abilities.
To identify the best candidates, Cowen suggests that interviewers focus on being authentic and spontaneous in their interactions with candidates, instead of relying on pre-written questions.
The interviewer should be trustworthy, Cowen argues, as it helps them to better evaluate the candidate's authenticity. Ultimately, allocating talent in better ways can contribute to economic growth, and a more thoughtful approach to interviews can help identify more talented individuals and elevate them to greater opportunities.
Read the video transcript ►mbigthink.com/series/explain-i...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About Tyler Cowen:
Tyler is the Holbert L. Harris Chair of Economics at George Mason University and serves as chairman and general director of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. He is co-author of the popular economics blog Marginal Revolution and co-founder of the online educational platform Marginal Revolution University.
Tyler also writes a column for Bloomberg View, and he has contributed to The Wall Street Journal and Money. In 2011, Bloomberg Businessweek profiled Tyler as “America’s Hottest Economist” after his e-book, The Great Stagnation, appeared twice on The New York Times e-book bestseller list.
He graduated from George Mason University with a bachelor's degree in economics and earned a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University. He also runs a podcast series called Conversations with Tyler. His latest book Talent: How to Identify Energizers, Creatives and Winners Around the World is co-authored with venture capitalist Daniel Gross.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read more of our stories on leadership:
Great leaders ask great questions: Here are 3 steps to up your questioning game.
►bigthink.com/leadership/the-s...
Why our instincts about innovation and change work against us
► bigthink.com/leadership/the-h...
How Stoicism can inspire fearless leadership
► bigthink.com/leadership/coura...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About Big Think | Smarter Faster™
► Big Think
The leading source of expert-driven, educational content. With thousands of videos, featuring experts ranging from Bill Clinton to Bill Nye, Big Think helps you get smarter, faster by exploring the big ideas and core skills that define knowledge in the 21st century.
► Big Think+
Make your business smarter, faster: bigthink.com/plus/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want more Big Think?
► Daily editorial features: bigthink.com/popular/
► Get the best of Big Think right to your inbox: bigthink.com/st/newsletter
► Facebook: bigth.ink/facebook
► Instagram: bigth.ink/Instagram
► Twitter: bigth.ink/twitter
What do you think of this approach to job interviews?
"Seem trustworthy by actually being trustworthy." Hilarious and obvious but so overlooked
But how do you seem trustworthy as an interviewer? What does that mean in practice? Too often you hear these obvious soundbites that most of us would agree with, but where’s the SUBSTANCE to it?
@@pjricci Here are some ideas:
Being honest and transparent about the interview process and the company's expectations.
Maintaining confidentiality and respecting the privacy of the interviewee.
Being objective and fair in your evaluation of the interviewee, avoiding personal biases.
Providing clear and constructive feedback to the interviewee, whether or not they are selected for the job.
Following up with the interviewee in a timely manner, regardless of whether they are selected for the job.
Creating a comfortable and professional environment for the interview.
Being well-prepared for the interview and having a clear understanding of the job requirements and qualifications.
Being respectful and courteous to the interviewee at all times.
Being open-minded and flexible, willing to consider a diverse range of candidates.
Being consistent in your approach to interviewing candidates, treating all candidates equally and giving everyone a fair chance.
@@pjricci Most people have a "BS" radar. If we feel like we're being sold or worse yet being oversold the needle moves on the radar.
Finally, a take on interviews that doesn't feel rote, repetitive or inspired by an assembly line. Thank you.
My dear brother, I am your sister from Yemen. I need help. We are displaced people from wars and our circumstances are difficult
@@Fatima.146 wtf
It is my belief that hiring managers aren't actually looking to hire the best high performers, but for the least risky ones that won't blow up and reflect badly on them personally.
Unfortunately also consequence of trouble-makers and low performers being accounted over (and blamed) the hiring manager... so yes, risk management is a good portion of it.
Mind that managers themselves are also assessed by their managers.
I learned this recently that sometimes managers hire based on how manageable a candidate would be. Not necessarily skills or qualities
Add to that ‘non-threatening’ given the likelihood that the HM is a bare minimum performer who isn’t interested in being out shone by their new hire. When I interview I’m a lot less interested in what they’ve already provided with their resume. Instead I ask them to share stories from their life and career that had an impact on them and look for insights into their character. I also listen to my Spidey sense for any creepy factors and cultural fit with the dynamic of the team. It’s a delicate balance but when u find it it’s glorious.
@@Vizslamum54321 Won't the candidate have already prepared several "candid" stories which actually paint them in the best possible light? Seems like standard practice.
@@Vizslamum54321 How do you define "cultural fit with the dynamic team" & do you choose candidates with less talent or potential based on cultural differences?
Extremely off-putting click-bait title (I came to downvote), that is a poor mismatch for the content. Something better might be "Managers: You're Probably Interviewing Wrong, Try This Instead"
Good video, terrible title. 👆
Agreed~
Some people don’t like hearing that they might be wrong. Sometimes these people have been put into a position of power. Like a manager.
What is wrong with the title? Is it just that it is click-baity? Or is it that the title suggests there are candidates that are seen as exceptional because of a response judged to be superior, when the judgement is probably harshly biased? Or is it something else?
Yes, but the idea that you are better than the others or somehow special is always tempting at first. That’s why they use it (clickbait as you pointed out.).
An explanation is no justification though, and I would like them to change it was well.
I actually would like interviews that are more conversational..so it would be nice for interviews to bring out the authenticity of a person. The anxiety and stress that comes from giving and prepping a canned answer feels pretty terrifying…and lame. I feel like it flattens the person and gives them less dimension. Imagine that..being able to be authentic and real in an interview 🤔
Completely agree. But the counter argument is going ‘off script’ and asking different questions to different candidates increases the risk of bias and reduces fairness. I’m not sure I agree, but it explains the often robotic, humourless interviewers out there. So what’s the solution?
@@pjricci that’s an interesting point, I get what you’re saying..it’s hard it be objective if you’re asking everyone different questions. Hmm 🤔
Mine is always “Where do you see yourself in five years?, and my reply is always:
“Not here, that’s for sure.”
Somehow, it always works, and I get hired. It never fails, and I usually spend 2.7 years in each organization. I think that’s very healthy. 3 years should be the norm.
😆
In short, make it human!
Unfortunately corporations transformed selection process in a production-line style approach.
My dear brother, I am your sister from Yemen. I need help. We are displaced people from wars and our circumstances are difficult
Excellent.
"The trick is there IS no trick!"
Be yourself to learn who they are.
How to talk without any substance, managerial positions 101.
Well said. You're not gonna get good candidates by asking them to tell you about themselves. The goal should be to get them to tell you so without them realizing it. That way, you can get to truly know the candidates.
In an ideal world where you only interview one person for the job and can see them in these different scenarios, can spend time with them and allow for mutual authenticity this would work. Most times candidates have to be compared to one another, and we’re talking 4-6 that are trying to get that same job. What’s the advice for the real life hiring with multiple confounding variables, to include the interviewee mood that day?
being trustworthy, I would recommend to rewatch it.
@@zjaeger1800 I’d recommend that you hire somebody.
I heard of a guy who took his candidates to a restaurant where they had the server make a mistake with the candidate's order to see how he dealt with the situation. Most times when we get rid of people, they're fired for reasons that relate to personal attributes rather than skills, so testing for whether a person is a toxic influence on their surroundings is an underrated aspect.
we have become so hyped about qualities that have little to do with creating added value. How about testing intelligence, technical proficiency, capacity to learn big and fast. I hired so many people who had great social skills, authentic, trustworthy, but absolutely wothless in terms of added value to the firm. very often its the awkward and strange candidates that bring the most value
Couldn't have said it better!
In the era of de-humanizing hiring technologies like hirevue, it is impossible to build a real conversation and trustworthiness. I wish I would be interviewed by someone like him
Ironic that a video about trustworthiness and authenticity has a misleading title.
I think employers should also be prepared for the type of people they will be getting when they look for creative, innovative people. Getting high performers and then putting them into a box is counterintuitive and you will get a high rate of churn.
Yea it's a bit of a paradox. There are great returns associated with getting creative and innovative people into the right positions, but putting them in a box repels them. At the same time, almost all "rites of passage" look something like putting people in a box. Invariably we get a system that selects for low creativity / conscientiousness personality types - even for positions where that doesn't fit.
The very hard question to answer and to ask is how much salary you want? Vise versa
Yes. Exactly this.
😁 Thanks ‼️
Ooh I like the final note! Trust in management is a huge factor for me.
I had a really weird thought after watching this and created such a scene. What do you think?
Tell us about yourself.
Well i am Cadis, I've graduated from this college, i like being in peace, having time to do other things than studying , i like order and organisation, i like being comfortable. I hate vague directions, emotionally directed people, people who are bad , people who don't want to fully help, and i highly dislike people who don't understand what they are saying.
Explain your ideal work environment.
Good management, good salary, not toxic culture, getting the work done on time , not being bombarded by work simply because of problems due to the management ( a 6 hour project is always going to take 6 hour regardless of how late the management is or how bad your negotiations are) , 6 hour work day, directed orders rather than vague projects as if the boss itself has no idea what he wants to do, complaints being taken seriously and disciplined leadership. I like team work, i hate corruption, in a perfect environment i wouldn't want to accept or direct calls from the job after working hours regardless of emergency.(if it was urgent you should have predicted that in the first place and managed that at earliest.), I would like to have the ability to refuse a project unless the conditions are met according to my terms (for example: i will take a 12 hour project and being told that i need to get it done by 6. No. If it's your own damn fault negotiate on your own behalf and buy me my god damn time. So your system formula works absolutely perfectly) I would like to have the ability to leave the company if it refuses to pursue its ideal or my own ideal environment as being ideal isn't an aim but a necessity in the first place. Not being exploited by superiors, I like rules but i will refuse to follow rules which makes absolutely no sense. I have high expectations from the company and my bosses to do their job best so i can have this environment, i would want my company to grow and take care of it's own members as they are the hard workers and i look forward to its future.
What's your weakness?
I refuse to follow vague instructions, rules that doesn't makes sense, corrupted management, exploitive team, i will refuse to work if and under absolutely no condition i will adhere to stay in your company if i cannot trust the company itself.
As you see i have really high expectations from the company. You could take some easy dull path and get some underachiever or get me and change your own company to the ideal environment.
What's your salary expectation?
********* Is the average on the market. Asking you to pay for this much isn't taking advantage over your. If i had to take advantage of you i would say ******* but I'll negotiate it back down to first number because you seems to improve and provide my ideal environment. And it would be nice if we meet a middle ground.
Have you ever done x , y and z?
Yes. I've volunteer myself since the first year of my college to get experience about the current market from ***** company. I am well experienced in that area.
Can I ask you few questions?
How much profit have you made this year and last 10 years?
Why isn't your company improving?
What do you think are you doing wrong?
Do you think hiring someone would solve that?
Your market value has increased/decreased over these years why?
What's your aim?
Why are you willing to work so hard?
If an interviewee has lot of expectations from your company what are you going to do to achieve them?
Who is the worst employee of your company and why?
Why are certain rules written in the contract? Can I negotiate to change some rules with my contract?
If i realise that someone else can do my work faster and i decide to hire them. Will I be positively reimbursed or negatively punished?
These requirements written in the posting. Who wrote these and knowing that there are a lot of people going to come, and it will take that much longer to solve that issue why didn't even a single one of your employee raised their hand and made it more precise rather than vague? Do they like working longer hours?
What are you going to do when you don't meet expectations? I want you to give my royalty if you cannot meet the expectations and decide to kick me off because of your own fault. Its a highly demanding warzone and i refuse to be under an incompetent leader who would take the easy way out and destroy his own land.
What are some serious complaints you have heard from your employees during last 10 years?
And how have you handled it?
What can you say that i can trust you and that you're not a fraud who just wants to push his own family aka workers into poverty?
@@manavtyagi6086 i appreciate your gift. But i can't accept any when people are living at desperate conditions somewhere. Help them instead of me.
If you think anyone s gonna read this shit, you have too much time. Go get a job instead of fantasizing about one 💀
@@mocerlaalacbaino how old r u
@@manavtyagi6086 I'm 15
@@manavtyagi6086 oh I'm so sorry lol i misinterpreted that.
Lots of managers and HR interviewers always don't tell the truth and the way they interview condidates is not mutual. To some extent, i like this video because having a true and sincere conversation during an interview between an interviewer and a candidate is the key for applications to understand the culture, atmosphere and workplace in a company. If an interviewer constantly asks a candidate multiple questions and always expect him/her to answer them, then this company is always hiding something, from my pov.
I guess "authenticity" will be the new buzzword in management theory.
But that would require authenticity from management.
Good luck with that.
These videos are really informative
Sounds great! I'd like to be interviewed by you 🙋♂️
Having listened to Conversations With Tyler, he's like one of the most hard hitting interviewees I've ever come across. I would honestly be scared lol.
Would love to hear an expert's opinion on P&G's online assessment before the job interviews stage - it is incredibly demanding and stressful I find it interesting that it's used as a filter
IQ tests? Isn't that something you can prep for and therefore probably cannot control for....when this speaker is looking for non-scripted output?
Great ideas, it's a shame the publishers debase the whole sentiment of the video with a clickbait-y title.
Some jobs need social skills and some, not so much. Whatever may be the case, make sure not to include any popular questions, and set up an interactive environment, focus on thinking process rather than final solution, be open to new perspective rather than dismiss anything that doesn't fit in your tiny box of 'right answer'.
Almost all jobs require social skills. There are fewer and fewer jobs these days where you are working in an isolated metal box with zero communication or relaying of info required.
The problem with just a plain discussion is that you end up introducing personal biases into the process and just hire someone who thinks the same as you. Thus you lose out on diversity and people that might bring other perspectives into the mix, not to mention gender or racial biases. We also over-estimate our ability to do an interview anyway, so thinking that just an informal conversation can get the right candidate is already pretty presumptuous. And if you have an ad-hoc discussion with every candidate, how could you even compare each candidate's performance comparatively beyond just "how it felt" or "gut intuition"? Or what if different people interview candidates, how will they compare when the evaluation is so subjective? I don't see how the approach suggested in this video can overcome any of these problems.
Totally agreed! Because then the interviewer is more likely to be authentic meaning biased, too!
On the other hand it shouldn’t be overconstructed either. Some middle ground would be good. Everything based on gut feeling only is not objective at all.
I'm not even sure why I'm here, the KY and Sock seem odd for this video.
I'd like to talk to you about that library behind you--within 20 minutes we'd know if we were right for each other for any job.
Ohh, that's actually a good idea. Have a candidate browse a bookshelf and select whatever books they'd be most likely to pick up at a library, and then you talk about the book. That's a good way to get into conversational mode.
It's like you need to be ready to play poker
i want to work with you
Authentic content, inauthentic title.
My dear brother, I am your sister from Yemen. I need help. We are displaced people from wars and our circumstances are difficult
As a hiring manager, I wish interviews would integrate more psychological principles, so we can better weed out those with personality disorders like BPD and NPD.
So in your opinion people with psychological disorders shouldn't be employed even when they are perfectly skilled for a position?
@@pablodemorais9320 I mean, let's be realistic...a person who is unable to be reliable and consistent is not an ideal person to work with. Not trying to knock people with BPD but it's an extremely undesirable trait, and you act like it has nothing to do with the job itself, which is most likely never the case.
@@logangantner3863Are you aware that people with BPD and/or NPD represent 1% to 2% of the population?
This proposition is not far off from excluding other mental conditions in the workforce. If one were to combine all illnesses which carry heavy societal stigma, soon enough you'd have a massive portion of the population deemed unfit to work.
Considering every single person is on a spectrum relating to their mental state, the logical conclusion would be to exclude all other mental conditions seen to get in the way of work as well: depression, general anxiety, bipolarity etc.
If the hatchet were to be opened on this criteria of weeding out employees based on their psychological profiles, nothing substantial guarantees candidates wouldn't be gaslit out of their opportunity to work. Therefore, it isn't HR's business what illnesses people do and don't have.
I perfectly agree with the notion that dealing with certain people in the workplace can be frustrating, however the due course of action must be the same applied to any other employee.
But wouldn’t that be discrimination? I think Title 9 prohibits that, and employers generally have a diversity statement in their hiring policies now.
@@pablodemorais9320 This has always felt like a bit of an ideological impossibility to me. Ignoring mental state in the hiring process feels as impossible and arbitrary as ignoring the candidate's personality. What if the hiring manager does not like working with cutesy personalities, or people with certain mannerisms, or Boston accents? Should these uncontrollable features be protected? And how do you even enforce it?
At the end of the day, people are going to hire who they want to hire. You can't prove that someone didn't hire you because you willingly checked the "BPD" box or exhibited any telling behaviors. The best those self-identifying boxes will ever accomplish is giving the opportunity for the company to formally meet a "diversity quota", assuming that is something their shareholders or the public even cares about for them.
Sorry to be harsh but that's kind of just how it is.
Biggest mistake in my last job? Trusting that my boss knew what he was talking about.
Same here. Particularly on her opinion of my performance and how I put so much effort into reacting to her make believe. I ended up destroying my self esteem and worth.
Please change the title. It suggests very different content. Vague pointers on how to gain very common information about an interviewee has almost nothing to do with what the title describes.
Borderline clickbait with unanswered questions. Why? Completely unnecessary.
I think the Big Think ad slogan at the end really devaluates the quality of these videos.
'Get smarter faster' is a pretty cheap and unrealistic slogan that wants to hook the viewers and kinda assumes they are greedy and foolish enough
to expect you can gain knowledge fast and easily. It is a pitty because the channel is great as well as the speakers.
I get it, but it's vague.
Title is misleading
My dear brother, I am your sister from Yemen. I need help. We are displaced people from wars and our circumstances are difficult
Hmmm, so the big tip is to be authentic. Alrighty then.
How many people has Tyler Cowen hired of late? How many teams has he built of late? How many of them in corporate settings?
He runs Emergent Ventures, where he basically plays the role of a VC. They've given out some 200-ish grants so far probably. Among the grants were one that led to the invention of the Covid spit tests.
My favorite high performer is Snoop Dogg. 🦁
Imagine jumping all these hoops to please this guy only to be offered a trash salary
Big Think is one of the most greatest channel to ever exist and i can proudly say that. You guys go in to such great topics that help to develop a person.But there is one main flaw in how you present your videos. In todays work you need to express complex information in an easier and shorter manner but immediately when i click in your video one intelectual person shows up( no offense) and keeps on talking using complex word. You know one of the reasons why trump won is that he conveyed complex words in simple language and in a fun way. What you have is great concepts but boring execution. yOU Guys have a person who stands or sit infront of a white wall and keeps on talking. Try to make your concepts simpler and easier along with fun to understand.(love you)
Gee I'd love to be interviewed in this manner and not just get pitched pet questions.
You want me to talk to people or do mu job?
As a recruiter, i 1000% disagree
Why?
- What's your biggest pet peeve?
+ Prep tests!
Omg what a horrible title and thumbnail for such a great video... It's irrelevant to the content itself, it's disrespectful to Mr. Cowen, and your video would do better if you we're honest with the bright people who subscribe to your Channel instead of this clickbait nonsense. It's a shame I can't recommend this to friends with the title and thumbnail, because they can certainly benefit from the advice
bro youre a tool, you need someone to tell you that .
We will eventually at some point just replace this whole interview/hire process with an AI assessment bot.
That already happens in some pre-screening stages for E.g. big tech companies. Like a bot screening a video of you for content, sentiment, etc.
See....THAT Gentleman get's it....unlike the umpteenth HR Clown who tries to reel you in for another Blind Signing with the umpteenth Version of "Where do you see yourself in 5 Years?".
@@markmower1746 No - but I do ask it sometimes (though not in those words). Usually I'm trying to understand if what I (my company) can offer in terms of career development is aligned to what a candidate wants/expects, particularly with younger, less experienced candidates. It's not a 'selection' question; it's a way to start a conversation on what the company can or cannot provide in terms of career development - if anything, it is to help the candidate select.
yeah that's silly question, my answer will always be mirror.
@@umbracul You want to be a mirror in 5 years?
@@markmower1746 And you think this is somehow useful to you or in any way relevant to a job? Unless of course you are applying for ghost writer for a fourth-rate pulp-fiction?
@@markmower1746 Because you want to marry a 62-year old mother of 2? Mind you, she is a lovely person, but...
the best and most useful job interview question is 'do You have any questions?'
Grr
Amazing. First one here
The worst invention ever ... Human Resources. It stifles everything you talked about here. As long as people are focused on covering their butts vs making a "good" hire, this won't change :(
Today, Isn't it more about what you look like, than whether your qualifications meet with approval? Ironically, it really is what you look like (or rather what you don't look like); your looks *are* your qualifications! Some would say we're being dragged by the hair towards the abyss!
Also, who you know.
The title of this video is just wrong and the visuals of the video are so incredibly distracting that it detracts from the person talking. This isn't a video aimed at "smart" people when all you do is keep switching the video out to stock footage of irrelevant things. The editor has ruined this quick (and good) talk about an effective interview process with a process meant for low attention span individuals that can't keep their attention on one thing for longer than 3 seconds. Inappropriate for this video.
Clickbait title. Unsubscribed
“Successful people make money. It’s not that people who make money become successful, but that successful people attract money. They bring success to what they do.” - Wayne Dyer...,
More of this. Less pseudo science plz.