Let's read...

There are so many problems on how talent evaluation is done today. In larger corporations, the problem tends to be too much bureaucratization. Too many boring interview processes that just make everyone a little bit numb. The interviewer goes through some rehearsed questions. The interviewee goes through some rehearsed answers. Everyone knows it's a bit phony. Neither side really learns that much. But I think that's also just the beginning of the mistakes we're making. One problem is that people, when hiring, they're too prone to hire other people like themselves. Those are virtues they find relatively easy to detect. Think about the role of intelligence in the hiring process. For people who are highly intelligent, highly skilled, the evidence is that they are overrating intelligence. For any kind of job, there might be some basic, minimum level of intelligence that would be required. But when you look above that level, it's remarkable how weak is the correlation between success and intelligence. There are other factors such as drive and determination, energy levels, how well you work with other people, leadership skills, charisma- all of those can be more important than intelligence. So I wouldn't say that everyone overrated intelligence, but it's the smart people who do, and that's exactly the problem.

Let's follow Tyler...

There are so many problems / on how talent evaluation / is done today. // In larger corporations, / the problem tends to be / too much bureaucratization. / Too many / boring interview processes / that just make everyone / a little bit numb. // The interviewer goes through / some rehearsed questions. / The interviewee / goes through some rehearsed answers. / Everyone knows / it's a bit phony. / Neither side / really / learns that much. / But I think that's also / just the beginning / of the mistakes / we're making. // One problem / is that people, / when hiring, / they're too prone to hire / other people / like themselves. / Those are virtues / they find / relatively easy / to detect. // Think about / the role of intelligence / in the hiring process. / For people / who are highly intelligent, / highly skilled, / the evidence is that they are / overrating / intelligence. / For any kind of job /, there might be some basic, / minimum level of intelligence / that would be required. // But when you look / above that level, / it's remarkable how weak / is the correlation / between success / and intelligence. / There are other factors / such as / drive and determination, / energy levels, / how well you work with other people, / leadership skills, / charisma- / all of those can be more / important than intelligence. // So I wouldn't say that everyone / overrates intelligence /, but it's the smart people who do, / and that's exactly the problem. //

Let's read...

If you're hiring people, you're also looking for people who are undervalued by the rest of the market. The way you really do well is by finding undervalued talents where the rest of the market is not seeing something. It could be the market doesn't understand fully how talent works. It could be a case of prejudice. There can be issues across race. There can be qualities that might appear negative, like neuroticism, but actually for a lot of jobs, neuroticism is a good thing. For your own success, focus not only on talent at the absolute level, but focus on which talents are the truly undervalued ones. I think another area where you find major biases is gender in the workplace. For instance, there is good evidence that very smart men tend to underrate how smart the very smartest women are. In most cases, I don't think it's explicit prejudice or chauvinism, though there is some of that. Men, when they interview women, at least on average, they tend to put too much weight on how they perceive the woman's personality. Whether they individually find it pleasant or agreeable. That might matter for the job, but you know, very, very often it doesn't. I think by being more open and just trying to look past some of your immediate emotional reactions, you can make better decisions.

Let's follow Tyler...

If you're hiring people, / you're also looking for people who are undervalued / by the rest of the market. / The way / you really / do well / is by finding / undervalued talents / where the rest of the market / is not seeing / something. / It could be / the market doesn't / understand fully how talent works. / It could be a case of prejudice. / There can be issues / across race. / There can be / qualities that might appear negative, / like neuroticism, / but actually / for a lot of jobs, neuroticism / is a good thing. / For your own success, / focus not only on talent / at the absolute level, / but focus on / which talents are the truly undervalued ones. // I think another area / where you find major biases / is gender in the workplace. / For instance, / there is good evidence / that very smart men tend to underrate / how smart / the very smartest women are. // In most cases, / I don't think it's explicit / prejudice or chauvinism, / though there is some of that. / Men, / when they interview women, / at least on average, / they tend to put too much weight / on how they perceive / the woman's personality. / Whether they individually find it pleasant or agreeable. / That / might matter for the job, / but you know, / very, very often it doesn't. / I think by / being more open / and just trying to look past / some of your immediate emotional reactions, / you can make better decisions.