Where to begin?

[Liquid validity]

Anyone on t2w definitely has an IQ of less than 130.

I scored 74 :smart:

 

[VielGeld]

You're seriously joking right? Everyone is smart enough to be a Rocket Scientist or a Brain surgeon? Why do you think tests (of any kind) were 'invented' in the first place? Just for the for the fun of it? Besides, this isn't about people who "can't learn anything", it was about people who want to be a trader. Are you saying people of ANY intelligence have what it takes?

I have sat through aptitude tests in the past when applying for a job. These were for trainee positions where they had literally 1000's of applicants applying for a limited number of vacancies. Most of us were still in high school applying for positions the following year.

[Snip]

You honestly say that each and every one of them has an equal chance of being trained successfully so you would interview them all?

Sure, IQ is one way to filter applicants. You would effectively segregate them by that metric. But IQ is something, not everything about intelligence, so you would lose something in the process and perfectly able applicants will be weeded out. Today most companies seem to use GPA, though.

And yes, I do believe many more individuals could be rocket scientists/surgeons than there are today, and they could successfully be trained. These jobs do take a certain measure of smarts, to be sure, but I doubt that smarts alone determine what makes you good at what you do. The right attitude, for one, can make a pretty big difference in performance in my experience.

I genuinely do believe most are smart enough to learn just about anything if they only put their minds to it. Not everyone, of course, but a bigger portion than many would give them credit for. I have a serious pet peeve against generalizations such as "most people are [...]" ('stupid' is often used... but guess what it is that most people say? ). I can't say I agree with lumping anyone into the 'incompetent' category just because they scored below-average... maybe the average is simply quite high already!

Anyway, I can say that I'll accept IQ as a way to cull a list of applicants (because some method needs to be used), but I would greatly dispute its relevance in measuring intelligence.

 

[the hare]

Anyway, I can say that I'll accept IQ as a way to cull a list of applicants (because some method needs to be used), but I would greatly dispute its relevance in measuring intelligence.

The quickest way to filter is to throw 75% of applicants CV's in the bin without reading them. Those applicants where unlucky, and no employer really wants to employ unlucky people do they ?

 

[Steve]

In all my years of working with hiring people, I did not come across one single recruitment methodology that was an accurate predictor of job performance, IQ or otherwise. Most firms end up with a blended approach, using the kinds of tests mentioned as an initial screen (or one of the other ineffective things on their list) so the numbers at least become more manageable.

The main problem is letting HR people get hold of it. Remove them and the quality of recruit would no doubt improve!

 

[counter_violent]

In all my years of working with hiring people, I did not come across one single recruitment methodology that was an accurate predictor of job performance, IQ or otherwise. Most firms end up with a blended approach, using the kinds of tests mentioned as an initial screen (or one of the other ineffective things on their list) so the numbers at least become more manageable.

The main problem is letting HR people get hold of it. Remove them and the quality of recruit would no doubt improve!

Theres no honesty in the process from either side, it ends up where neither party gets what they think their getting.

Employers bull up the job to be something it's not.
Potential employees pitch up or down depending on their perception of teh job on offer.

 

[Atilla]

Theres no honesty in the process from either side, it ends up where neither party gets what they think their getting.

Employers bull up the job to be something it's not.
Potential employees pitch up or down depending on their perception of teh job on offer.

Remember there is the 6 months probation period!

There is also freelance contracting. Usual roll-over 1 - 3 or 6 month contracts so if you don't perform you are out.

 

[Shakone]

The quickest way to filter is to throw 75% of applicants CV's in the bin without reading them. Those applicants where unlucky, and no employer really wants to employ unlucky people do they ?

Why is that the quickest? Wouldn't throwing away 90% or 95% be even faster?

I agree with CV that it is often pretty dishonest from both sides, but I disagree with Steve that there is no accurate predictor of job performance. University, degree type, degree class etc are all good predictors of future performance. They're not guarantees, but nothing is. If it's a choice between HR assessment days, an individual interviewer's opinion, or their tested qualifications, I'd go with qualifications every time. Unfortunately, too often these things are influenced by HR, simply because those qualified to judge don't have the time or desire.

 

[Steve]

Why is that the quickest? Wouldn't throwing away 90% or 95% be even faster?

I agree with CV that it is often pretty dishonest from both sides, but I disagree with Steve that there is no accurate predictor of job performance. University, degree type, degree class etc are all good predictors of future performance. They're not guarantees, but nothing is. If it's a choice between HR assessment days, an individual interviewer's opinion, or their tested qualifications, I'd go with qualifications every time. Unfortunately, too often these things are influenced by HR, simply because those qualified to judge don't have the time or desire.

I agree with the last bit, that those qualified to judge don't have the time or desire. Maybe the results would be better if they did.

As for a degree what does that prove? I'll agree if it is job related but if you are simply relating a degree level education to likely achievement it proves absolutely nothing, in my opinion of course.

 

[tar]

As for a degree what does that prove? I'll agree if it is job related but if you are simply relating a degree level education to likely achievement it proves absolutely nothing, in my opinion of course.

+1

 

[robster970]

The quickest way to filter is to throw 75% of applicants CV's in the bin without reading them. Those applicants where unlucky, and no employer really wants to employ unlucky people do they ?

In my dim and distant past, we had a receptionist called Kim who I knew well because of the amount of hiring and firing I used to do. We would play a game where she would ring up to tell me the candidate had arrived and purely off her interaction she would tell me whether the person would get the job or not. We monitored it over about 100 people and she was right >80% of the time. It seriously made me realise that interviews were generally a waste of time and I cut them down to < 15mins as a result without any serious side effects.

Binning them randomly seems churlish - just eyeball the candidate for 45secs and you'll know.

 

[robster970]

The main problem is letting HR people get hold of it. Remove them and the quality of recruit would no doubt improve!

Yep - I found that HR involvement in any hiring process generally caused a decline in candidate quality and sifting, primarily because they don't have a fncking clue what they are doing.

What was once an administrative function is now a 'profession'.

 

[new_trader]

I genuinely do believe most are smart enough to learn just about anything if they only put their minds to it.

This is where you and almost everyone else is missing the point of IQ tests. They are designed to measure both Crystallized intelligence and Fluid intelligence. In fact, Culture Fair tests probable are more biased to Fluid intelligence, which IMO is more important for successful trading. Do you honestly believe you can teach someone to be a successful trader? The anecdotal evidence doesn't back this up.

I would bet ANY money you like that the students who get the best GPA would also have a high IQ.

Finally, most people ARE dumber than sheep...my goodness, how old are you?

 

[D70]

This is where you and almost everyone else is missing the point of IQ tests. They are designed to measure both Crystallized intelligence and Fluid intelligence. In fact, Culture Fair tests probable are more biased to Fluid intelligence, which IMO is more important for successful trading. Do you honestly believe you can teach someone to be a successful trader? The anecdotal evidence doesn't back this up.

I would bet ANY money you like that the students who get the best GPA would also have a high IQ.

Finally, most people ARE dumber than sheep...my goodness, how old are you?

You need a "culture fair test" vendor badge. :clap:

 

[Atilla]

Yep - I found that HR involvement in any hiring process generally caused a decline in candidate quality and sifting, primarily because they don't have a fncking clue what they are doing.

What was once an administrative function is now a 'profession'.

I think taking the effort to interview is well worth the effort and I prefer 3.

1. HR interview by company
2. Technical interview by department
3. Final Interview to scale down selected few to the 'one'


I've been fortunate enough to work with some excellent colleagues. The bad apples are far and few in between from my perspective. If some don't perform - they get dealt with pretty swiftly.

 

[robster970]

I think taking the effort to interview is well worth the effort and I prefer 3.

1. HR interview by company
2. Technical interview by department
3. Final Interview to scale down selected few to the 'one'


I've been fortunate enough to work with some excellent colleagues. The bad apples are far and few in between from my perspective. If some don't perform - they get dealt with pretty swiftly.

I distilled this process into:

1. Offline technical tests if they were development/design roles - most failed.
2. Up to 30 minute phone interview, generally lasting about 10mins
3. F2F where we gave them an exercise and a whiteboard - you know within 3mins whether they cut it or not. If they did OK, we would do a more complex exercise. If they were struggling on the first exercise, terminate the interview after about 15 minutes.

Every now and again someone would get through who turned out to be socially disruptive and we would get rid within 10 working days.

As an (ex) senior manager of a big development shop, the only person who pays the price of poor hiring is the managers so I got used to killing off problems early whilst not wasting time on unnecessary hiring doctrine that adds marginal value.

 

[barjon]

Yep - I found that HR involvement in any hiring process generally caused a decline in candidate quality and sifting, primarily because they don't have a fncking clue what they are doing.

What was once an administrative function is now a 'profession'.

I can subscribe to that . Never involved in recruitment but much involved in promotion interviews. HR would not let you ask hypothetical questions (what would you do if....) only questions related to their experience (what did you do when ....).

Following the HR route meant that half the time people prattled on about what someone else did to resolve the problem whilst pretending that they were the prime mover.

 

[Radec]

All of this was an interesting read.

 

[Atilla]

I distilled this process into:

1. Offline technical tests if they were development/design roles - most failed.
2. Up to 30 minute phone interview, generally lasting about 10mins
3. F2F where we gave them an exercise and a whiteboard - you know within 3mins whether they cut it or not. If they did OK, we would do a more complex exercise. If they were struggling on the first exercise, terminate the interview after about 15 minutes.

Every now and again someone would get through who turned out to be socially disruptive and we would get rid within 10 working days.

As an (ex) senior manager of a big development shop, the only person who pays the price of poor hiring is the managers so I got used to killing off problems early whilst not wasting time on unnecessary hiring doctrine that adds marginal value.

Pretty much the same thing but at a more formal level if I may say so.

HR's role is to go through the CV and check it for integrity follow up on references, pick out gaps in CV etc. Objective being to see if candidate is suitable for company and image. I usually found HR to be very valuable and insightful in vetting suitable candidates.

2nd interview is see if candidate as well as having right character has right skill sets. Fit for purpose. :smart:

3rd interview obviously try to pick the best of the crop and reach a sort of consensus view within the team and interviewers.


I do agree though within a short space of time by speaking to a person and their responses often gives one a quick feel as to whether they are suitable or not.

Fit for purpose - their skill sets can be sometimes easier to ascertain than odd character 'disorders'


There is a great book I would strongly recommend on character types in the work place to anybody interested. Dealing with People You Can't Stand

Makes one appreciate how people tick. How to read and respond to odd personalities.

 

[Steve]

Pretty much the same thing but at a more formal level if I may say so.

HR's role is to go through the CV and check it for integrity follow up on references, pick out gaps in CV etc. Objective being to see if candidate is suitable for company and image. I usually found HR to be very valuable and insightful in vetting suitable candidates.

2nd interview is see if candidate as well as having right character has right skill sets. Fit for purpose. :smart:

3rd interview obviously try to pick the best of the crop and reach a sort of consensus view within the team and interviewers.


I do agree though within a short space of time by speaking to a person and their responses often gives one a quick feel as to whether they are suitable or not.

Fit for purpose - their skill sets can be sometimes easier to ascertain than odd character 'disorders'


There is a great book I would strongly recommend on character types in the work place to anybody interested. Dealing with People You Can't Stand

Makes one appreciate how people tick. How to read and respond to odd personalities.

Hmm, perhaps I should read that Atilla to help me with some of the characters on here

 

[Atilla]

Hmm, perhaps I should read that Atilla to help me with some of the characters on here

It has enabled me to get to like and in some cases respect people who I could not stand to begin with - as in the book title.

Even if you don't like them it allows a method, an approach for dealing with them in an attempt to get the best out of bad situation.

Hate to say it but it has helped me in understanding and appreciating my wife too.