Comments on: Who: The A Method for Hiring by Smart and Street

By: Venkat

Venkat — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:07:18 +0000

Deep: Probably a 6/10, B+. For calibration, all the related books I’ve cited in this article would probably rate between 7 and 9.

By: Deep Gupta

Deep Gupta — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:53:06 +0000

How would you rate this book on a scale of 1 -10?

1 obvilously being appauling and, 10 being excellent.

By: Venkat

Venkat — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:53:06 +0000

Good point about the simplicity-complexity tradeoff. There’s good reason to believe that besides complexity theory. More rules = heavier model = less bandwidth left for independent judgment about what’s NOT in the model. James Scott analyzes this in ‘Seeing Like a State’ beautifully. Also agree on how people use metrics sometimes to avoid responsibility for having to think.

That said, good processes are a matter of art, so they keep you honest without making you stupid. Overall, the process in this book meets that criterion.

By: Daryl

Daryl — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:30:00 +0000

Venkatesh,

Great review of this book. Thanks.

I agree with your criticisms that we have too many methods these days that focus on objectivity as an undeniably good thing. In this book, it sounds like that is emphasized, with subjectivity being labeled as “voodoo.” C’mon. Objectivity and subjectivity are two sides of the same coin, they are both part of every process.

Another point I would add is that, from complexity theory, we hear that simple rules enable complex, intelligent behavior, while complex rules enable only simple, stupid behavior. I can so easily see someone using this scorecard and saying “Well, I picked the person who ranked 27 over the person with 26, even though my gut told me it was a bad choice.”

By: Venkat

Venkat — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 15:45:55 +0000

The book doesn’t have any advice for interviewees. I’ve seen quite a few blog posts doing the rounds from career counselors recently, on the ‘don’t take the first thing you’re offered’ theme.

Interviewees suffer a strong information asymmetry, whether times are good or bad. The only solid piece of advice I’ve seen is: go to as many interviews as you can. Comparing job opportunities weeds out irrelevant information and only leaves you thinking about discriminants. Comparing opportunity A to opportunity B is vastly more practical than comparing either to an abstract notion of ‘dream job.’

By: irv

irv — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 00:03:41 +0000

I haven’t read much about interviewing and hiring practices since I am not in management and don’t aspire to it. But as someone who has been through a lot of interviews, I have to ask: Does the method in this book provide any guidance for the flip-side of the interview – that is, the bit where the prospective employee is checking out the prospective employer?

With the economy currently being a hirer’s market, the question may not sound too important but eventually things will go the other way. One reason the question occurs to me is that before starting my current job, I was offered another job that would have paid a lot more money than I was then making (though less than I’m making now, as it turns out).

I turned the job down because there were some things during the interview that set off red flags in my mind. Though I couldn’t know it at the time, it turned out I was right. What does the literature say about making sure BOTH sides of the interview process work?

By: Christian Roy

Christian Roy — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:07:51 +0000

Thanks for the very complete review. I totally agree with one of your conclusions: “The point is that the situation dictates whether or not you should precisely define a role before starting a search.” It’s all about balance et getting the right techniques for the right situation.