This is very interesting Zubby! I agree with Dan that in light of the recent Hitachi case, this seems like a problem that a lot of companies are trying to solve. As in the case discussion, I am curious to understand the bias in self reporting bias if the pulse survey is used as all employees will report what they want to show they are feeling rather than their true feelings. I wonder how important employee mood is in achieving organizational goals as it is hard to make everyone happy!
Thank you for sharing your experience Pallavi! I do agree that there is a degree of discomfort about being evaluated by just algorithms and the tests that one has to take in a defined period of time. I do wonder whether understanding the goals of the test and sharing more information than the resume you had submitted would change the results of the tests because one of the reasons that this test works is that it takes away any bias of perceived brand value and skills you are said to have based on what you have on your resume and tests for just skills needed for the job. I do however agree that there is room for measuring other qualities that are more related to human emotions that could be baked in using other forms of test. I also struggle with completely trusting an algorithm to make the decision on whether I get the job or not. I am however excited to see where this company takes the product!
I agree Zubby, that the emotional and stress situation reactions of a candidate is not getting appropriately evaluated by using this test alone. I think their video interview analytics tool and other ways of quantifying those aspects would be welcome. However, assessing the grit of a candidate remains a challenge in today’s hiring process as well. Despite having intensive in person interviews, reference checks and detailed resumes, we are not able to assess those aspects of the candidates being considered for hiring. I share your excitement on this topic and truly believe that this could be a tool in democratizing opportunities.
Jade! Super interesting article! Two topics I really like discussing combined in one article. I agree with your views on the curation point on social media and have grappled with the choice that people have in engaging with these platforms. There is an argument to be made that there is positive content to prevent negative feelings so wide spread on the internet and therefore, I question whether employers using this as the sole tool for analyzing mental health is the right form of measure. It could be most certain one data input and be supplemented with the flagging of extremely positive or negative data being flagged as you suggested and then following up with the employee with some questionnaire to ask questions to fortify the data collected from social media. I cannot speak for everyone but I do see social media as an outlet for creativity and also a way to be connected and therefore elements of the content can provide insights for those parameters! Exited to see how companies tackle this!
This is a very interesting article Hanyin! I particularly enjoyed reading your pros and cons analysis on this product. It is quite interesting to me that data has been used to establish such interesting insights as the example of the basketball playing and sales skills. I was actually thinking that it would be possible to argue that all the pros that you have listed could be cons as well. While I do not undermine the importance of the human touch, I do feel like it brings back the bias that algorithm is taking out and similarly, while students will not have to pad their resumes, they will still have the incentive to list all their experiences in order to allow for those credentials to translate to skills. For example, the example for Intuit above, as someone applying for the job, I would still want to list down all the companies I worked at, education institutes I went to and non career skills I have. While this is great for those who don’t have some of the traditional successful brands on their resume, I wonder what the incentive for companies would be to hire from there and whether the perceived value bias can be completely taken out with human involvement.
This drew my attention right away as I worked at Barclays! I did not participate in any of these programs knowingly but wonder now whether I was under surveillance. Haha! I think you have made some valid points and Paula in her comment has highlighted some insights that could have had a different reaction from the employees. As someone who as has worked in banking, I believe there is an additional metric of defining what the productive way of doing work is. Unlike a sales oriented organised in day to day sales target, the day to day work at a bank could really involve work over a deal that spans over months. Hence enhanced monitoring could mean implementing more face time and a very rigid idea of what would mean productive time or as the article puts it “In the zone” behavior. The solution would work if there were defined targets along with the effective communication.