Google will not hire one group, middle aged.
Exactly, I am more impressed with someone who had a 3.0 GPA who financed their education by working through college, than someone who lived on loans and got a 4.0.
from the article;
“Bock cites a common error in “successful” people without intellectual humility:
“They, instead, commit the fundamental attribution error, which is if something good happens, it’s because I’m a genius. If something bad happens, it’s because someone’s an idiot or I didn’t get the resources or the market moved. … What we’ve seen is that the people who are the most successful here, who we want to hire, will have a fierce position. They’ll argue like hell. They’ll be zealots about their point of view. But then you say, ‘here’s a new fact,’ and they’ll go, ‘Oh, well, that changes things; you’re right.’”
___________________
I think this is the fundamental reason FR is headed for eventual demise.
Pretty much describes the Obama administration. People with worthless degrees. Or is it worthless people with degrees. I forget.
Within a certain range, he is correct. In comparing two people, one with a math SAT of 800, and one with a score of 750, other factors become more important as to which would be a better hire.
But somehow I doubt he would hire somebody as a research scientist who barely passed getting his degree from Podunk U, and had SAT Math & Verbal scores below 400 each, no matter how great a personality the guy had.
This appears to be a change in hiring strategy at Google.
Read a book recently about the early days of the company, and they were very proud that their hiring was based almost entirely on metrics. GPA, SAT, etc.
A stupid strategy, IMO, for exactly the reasons described in the article.
In this respect, Google is right.
A senior I know with top grades at a middle-of-the-road HS at best, is being recruited by elite universities for his interests in bio-medical engineering.
That said, it is interesting that "ability to learn" is the key desired attribute. That is exactly what the traditional liberal arts degree was supposed to nurture. Too many of the colleges have devalued their own product. If the pendulum swings back, good.
the top quality it looks for in job candidates is the ability to learn.
The "ability to learn" should be reflected in the acheivement of good grades and high test scores. If not, that is a problem with the grades and test scores. If you take a person who gets all A's, and compare them to a person who gets all C's, you should find that the straight-A student is better at learning than the straight-C student.
It is true that getting perfect grades and test scores is useless for determining if a person can be a good leader, or be a good team worker. It also wouldn't show you if a person would be a good teacher, or be good at welding, or at being a salesperson.
For decades I have pointed out that we put too much emphasis on "leadership" and too little on "followership".
Usually I would get an odd look like I had said something very foolish. This was often from the same people who would fail to cooperate when everything wasn't being done the way they thought it should be. Definitely a failure of "followership" on their part.
I’m not sure if they still do it but Google used to run recruitment ads in the MENSA magazine. Seems to conflict with the general tenor of this story.
Oh please. Being an extreme leftist will get you a job at Google. They have a different definition of humility.
If some CEO says IQ is not important in tech jobs, he’s full of fecal matter. Sure, a college degree is not absolutely necessary for certain people who at the age of fifteen probably knew more about tech stuff than their schoolteachers. But to say that a certain basic level of high, native intelligence isn’t needed in those jobs is an outright falsehood.
“In a New York Times interview on “How to get a job at Google,” Bock said, shockingly, that “GPAs are worthless as a criteria for hiring, and test scores are worthless. … We found that they don’t predict anything.”
They probably spend their time going to the various Mathematical Olympiads to spot future talent.
Bay Area Mathematical Olympiad http://www.bamo.org/ - 4k - Cached -
We have a young relative who has participated in these events for about 4 years. I have fun watching the non related adults watching the events, scouting the talent and brain pool.
The IBMers were obvious in their suits, the Stanford Professors in their tan Camel Hair sport coats and brown wool pants, the IVY leaguers with two aides to help them maneuver their over grown egos and arrogance, the Chico State profs in their tevas and Bermuda shorts, the Cal Poly guys in Levis and cowboy boots that have never seen a ranch, and the MS hippies and the future Steve Job wanna bee Apples. Last but not least the NSA ers and Spooks from the farm outside of DC.
They get to see the teams and individuals present their projects and compete with other teams. They can take notes or use their smart phones to document what future hires are doing.
By the time these kids mature and get ready for college, the on lookers have a good “book” on their abilities.