- When it comes to talent, We will try to teach you to think past the bureaucracy.
- We focus on a very specific type of genius in this book — the genius with a creative spark — and that’s where the bureaucratic approach is most deadly. Speaking of creative sparks, we mean people who create new ideas, start new organizations, develop new ways to run familiar products, lead intellectual or charitable movements, or inspire others by their presence, leadership and charisma regardless of context. By .
- – Tyler Cowen and Daniel Gross, Talent: How to identify energizers, creatives and winners around the world (P. 9)
EThe communist and polymath Tyler Cowen teamed up with young Silicon Valley star Daniel Gross to write a book that gives ideas on how to find and encourage talent. This is an issue that has fascinated me for a long time, as an employing manager and as an economist. In fact, shortly after I left the business world, I wrote an article that said,
- In today’s economy, capital allocation can no longer be the primary scarce resource.
- সহজ It is easy to understand the economic challenge as one of the talent allocation for problem solving.
Cowen and Gross (CG) point to the need to be able to find talent in other cultures. In the coming decades, the proportion of the world’s youth coming from Africa will increase, and those looking for talent will be able to find it there.
When we think about the problem of capital allocation, we think about the stock market. There are some similarities between the problem of talent allocation and the problem of stock selection, but there are also some differences.
Success in the stock market comes from finding the best company, not the most Underestimated Institutions. Similarly write CG,
- অনেক To see the whole package requires a lot of deep artificial ability, a lot of luck, and what we call entrepreneurial caution — that is, the ability to identify and realize talents that others cannot see. (2)
In major professional sports, especially baseball, we have seen the phenomenon described in Michael Lewis. Moneyball. Equipped with increasingly sophisticated data, statisticians have become increasingly involved in the talent-evaluation process. Until now, a similar approach would not work to identify great entrepreneurs, business leaders or cultural innovators. But CG hints at the possibility of a data-driven approach at some point in the future.
For now, the data we need to work with contains a lot of noise. Success in areas where CG is concerned is not measured specifically like stock market investing or baseball.
CG sees talent as a result of psychological traits and it creates another source of noise. Measurements of IQ are reliable, so that they replicate well across different testing instruments and over the same person over time. As a result, IQ in many cases works better than other systems as a predictor of success. But write CG
- Why Richardson and Sarah H. The most measured and thought-provoking study by Norgate কদের The researchers concluded: [between IQ and job performance] In general, more than 95% of the diversity is left unsaid. “
- So in other words, chasing high-IQ hiring with some other considerations is not a good way to find the talent… smart people – and maybe you are one of them – overestimate the importance of smart. (93)
Yet these “other considerations” are plagued by bad noise. CG discusses the Big Five personality traits that are most respected by academic psychometricians: openness, conscience, extroversion, consent, and nervousness. My guess is that these systems are not so reliable, that the results may vary depending on the survey instrument used and that it is not necessarily stable for one’s lifetime. I also think they can be extremely context-sensitive. One can be introverted at a sports bar and still be extroverted at a faculty lunch.
“… the kind of talent they’re looking for is at the very top, and they’ve found that research focused on extreme success sometimes shows that different factors are important.”
CG notes that some research on the impact of personality on performance focuses on employees near average. But the kind of talent they are looking for is at the very top and they have found that research focused on extreme success sometimes shows that different factors are important.
Not surprisingly, given the underlying noise of the personality measurement process, it is difficult to generalize how one can use a score in the Big Five to evaluate talent or potential. CG Conclusion,
- … A tool to combine and communicate the diffused knowledge found within your employer network in various guises of personality theory. Think more in terms of a useful language for your team, rather than trying to reflect, replicate or guess recent academic results. (124)
In organizations it helps to be able to identify how personality traits differ in order to facilitate collaboration and mutual respect. I believe that for that purpose, other personality systems, such as Myers-Briggs, may prove easier to understand and use, although they are statistically less vocal than the Big Five.
However, I will mention that candidates in the personality test do not have a Big Five score for working with hiring managers and venture capitalists. Instead, they form Impressions Candidates’ personality traits, collected from interviews and at least some reference checks. It identifies another important source of noise – the difference between how the interviewer perceives the candidate and how the candidate will score in a formal personality test.
That said, CG believes that personality is very important, and I agree. They further believe that personality can be assessed on the basis of competent interviews. I agree with that, and their chapter on “How to Interview and Ask Questions” provides a food for thought for anyone involved with any organization.
CG especially rewards those who are dedicated to self-improvement. They want to hear people explain how they can improve themselves. “What do you do to make a practice similar to how a pianist practices scales?” One of their interview questions.
Some of their favorite questions,
- Ask the respondent to give an account of their own self-awareness. In essence, you are trying to learn how much a person owns cultural and intellectual worlds and how much they have a point of view about their own perspectives. By “meta” we mean the person who, from one point of view, considers their own thinking to be one level higher, more general, and more distant. (49)
I would say it can be applied to interviews. Practice and self-assessment are important. Why couldn’t I get the candidate to relax and open up? Why is this person not suitable? What did I miss?
When I meet someone new in a social environment, I often ask a lot of the same kind of questions that I would ask if I was interviewing for their job. This is similar to how a pianist practices scales.
I would warn against trying to copy someone’s hiring method, as if one style fits all. You need to be very aware of your own personality and how it affects what you are looking for. CG is deliberately looking for high diversity individuals. Like venture capitalists, they are willing to take risks for a higher upside. It may not be your style, just as investing in a start-up may not be your style.
When I hire employees, I can tolerate arrogance, because a truly good software engineer can be much more productive than a run-of-the-mill developer. But other managers will never tolerate Prima Donna.
For more on this topic, see
Recruitment is different in different contexts. I never had more than a handful of employees, so I had to deal with a lot of context Me. In the interview between the two of us, I Often had quirkier personalities. I invite respondents to ask questions, and the best indicator of suitability is how long this reverse question-and-answer session lasted. Will try to portray a good candidate Me Out, decide whether I It was worth taking a chance.
Whichever side of the interview table you are on, you want to be better at evaluating the other person. Reading is a great way to improve your ability to identify talents in context Talent.