Recruiting Animal

Opposites Do Not Attract

From: The Ugly Husbands Club by Tony Dokoupil

“The fundamental rule,” says Michael Rosenfeld, a Stanford University sociologist who studies how couples form, “is that married partners tend to be the same on every dimension except for gender.” In other words, opposites do not attract.

David M. Buss, an evolutionary psychologist at the University of Texas, and author of The Evolution of Desire.

“As a general rule,” he says, “women tend to be more attractive than their husbands. ... men place a greater premium on looks in a partner; women place a greater premium on personality, character, status, and income.”

These “evolved mate preferences,” he adds, are also why powerful women may sleep with the occasional flesh toy, but only powerful men typically marry their much younger, hotter dalliances.

Buss says that homely women married to sexpot men are most at risk of the relationship failing. “Attractive men are known to have more sex partners, more affairs,” he writes, “so women married to these guys are at risk.”

He’s less concerned about discrepancies that run the other way, however, as long as “overall mate value” remains roughly the same...

But there’s really only one thing that brings two people together and keeps them that way, says Helen Fisher, a biological anthropologist at Rutgers University and the author, most recently, of Why Him? Why Her?  It’s called self-deception.

“As long as you continue to think that this person is right for you—no matter how irrational it may be—then it’s going to be a good marriage.”

 

 

Charmed by the candidate, you ignore the resume

From Ron Radosh

An intriguing op-ed ^[1] by Drew Westen, a leftist professor of psychology at Emory University, appears in today’s New York Times.

What is surprising about Professor Westen’s article is that many of his observations make points that conservatives have said about President Barack Obama for quite some time. 

Take this paragraph, for example, in which Westen asks why Obama seems to “take both sides of every issue, encouraging voters to project whatever they want on him”:

The most charitable explanation is that he and his advisers have succumbed to a view of electoral success to which many Democrats succumb — that “centrist” voters like “centrist” politicians. Unfortunately, reality is more complicated.

Centrist voters prefer honest politicians who help them solve their problems.

A second possibility is that he is simply not up to the task by virtue of his lack of experience and a character defect that might not have been so debilitating at some other time in history.

Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he had voted “present” (instead of “yea” or “nay”) 130 times, sometimes dodging difficult issues.

If Professor Westen ignored all of the above, it speaks only to his inability and that of his like-minded friends to read such warnings by various commentators who regularly made these points at PJMedia as well as National Review, The Weekly Standard, and other conservative outlets.

COMMENT: I post this critque of Obama not for any political significance. I'm only pointing out that people will ignore the weaknesses on a resume if the candidate is personally very impressive. Then, if things go wrong, they regret it or, like Westen, blame the candidate rather than themselves.

 

Good Conversationalist, Unimpressive Orator

James Madison was a poor public speaker but outstanding in small groups

Many observers noted the contrast between his awkward reserve with crowds and strangers, and his genial fluency with intimates.

“his form, features, and manner were not commanding, but his conversation exceedingly so and few men possessed so rich a flow of language, or so great a fund of amusing anecdotes, which were made the more interesting for their being well-timed and well-told.

His ordinary manner was simple, modest, bland, and unostentatious, retiring from the throng and cautiously refraining from doing or saying anything to make himself conspicuous.” But in private, ever since Princeton, he even liked a dirty joke.

Myron Magnet, The Great Little Madison, City Journal, Spring 2011

Conclusion: it's not always easy to judge people

 

 

Out of Character

Anyone involved in the hiring process has to assess people. They try to determine how she or he will act on the job. So, it's worth noting that people can often upset expectations.

From: The Toronto Star, May 09, 2011: Police deserve jail for 2009 beating

Allen heard a string of police officers testify that the attack on Moore was well out of character for Ing and Cruz.

“He’s very even-tempered,” Staff Sgt. Michael Richmond of 51 Division said of Cruz. “He has a very quiet disposition.”

“He’s calm, collected at all times,” Const. Julie Rice of 51 Division said of Ing. “It’s (the beating is) totally out of character.”

Moore suffered fractured ribs, a broken finger, dislocated shoulder, a gash to his scalp and abrasions to his abdomen, hip and shoulder when he was chased to the door of his rooming house and beaten by the officers.

The officers then arrested Moore for being drunk in public, a charge that was later thrown out after medical tests revealed he had no alcohol in his system.

Allen rejected the officers’ testimony that they were trying to protect Moore from wandering out into traffic.

 

 

 

It's Not Always Easy to Assess People

For anybody who has studied from Steinsaltz’s volumes, meeting him can be quite a shock. The Steinsaltz on the page is brief, succinct, and sometimes even terse.

The Steinsaltz who sits at his desk, puffing on his pipe while letting his tea go cold, responds to questions with long, winding answers, shooting off on tangents along the way.

There is even a diversion before we start: His warm and non-egocentric nature means that he insists on interviewing this interviewer before talking about himself.

This contrast, he admits, is no coincidence. “This work was in many ways to keep myself in rein,” he said, explaining that it disciplined his writing style and his intellectual direction.

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/135953/#ixzz1GCjVHxNE

People Can Surprise You

Source: Wall Street Journal. (edited)

Harry Truman was a small town man whose career had been sponsored by a corrupt political boss.

Then he was carelessly elevated to a senior role by Frank Roosevelt. And, yet as the sponsor of the Marshall Plan and the policy of containment, he did done great things.

Peggy Noonan concludes that:

People can come from nowhere, with modest backgrounds and short résumés, and yet be individuals of real gifts.... that are suddenly revealed.

You have to give people time to show what they have. Because maybe they have magic too.

Don't Hire People Who Have Young Children

Interviewer: Do you have little kids at home?

Candidate: Yes, we do.

Interviewer: Nice meeting you.

People with young kids are always tired.
This is typical:

"I often feel worn out before the day even starts.
The other day I was nodding off at my desk."

When people lived in the forest, they could lay down for a snooze whenever they wanted.

Now, with both parents obliged to take baby duty during the night and go to work the next morning, no one who has little kids ever gets enough sleep.

And we all know how important sleep is, don't we. Every health article is harping on it all of the time.

So, why would you want to hire someone when he's bound to be inefficient? Isn't it enough that you're stuck with the parents you brought in when they were single.

Although it was tongue in cheek, this posting got a lot of comments first time around. Papa said it helped us reach "new lows".

This week, we'll take a look at the biggest surprises and disappointments in the Recruiting blogs. Pretty slim pickings.

Recruiting.com, who we are still trying to love, reaches new lows with "Don't Hire People Who Have Young Kids" and....
-- interbiznet, August 04, 2005

Does a recruiter have to specialize?

Mediocre Singer impressed Simon Cowell.

Paul Potts (the Englishman not the Cambodian) has become a success because of his appeal to people who don't normally listen to classical music. His singing, apparently, isn't anything special; anyone with the same level of training could do the same.

But his acclaim comes from people like Simon Cowell who aren't familiar with opera and don't know what they are judging.

If people haven't listened to much classical music, anything sounds good because they don't have any point of comparison. But someone who does listen regularly will be able to tell the performers apart and grade them.

Isn't the same true in recruiting? If you don't know anything about mechanical design how can you tell a good mechanical designer from a rotten one? You can't analyze a drawing and you don't know what questions to ask to give you some point of measurement by which you can compare them.

Animal Show NOON EST

Guest: Lee Salz of Salesdodo.com
Topic: How to target and screen sales reps
Call to talk: 646-652-2754
Listen only: Hit Click to Listen button once show begins

Your Face Tells Strangers How Good You Are

by The Recruiting Animal. Source: The Economist

From Psychologists, Tufts U:
When people saw 2-second clips of profs lecturing, they rated them the same way their actual students did.

Next Test: When undergrads saw photos of CEO's faces from of the top and bottom 25 Fortune 1000 firms and graded them as leaders their ratings matched the standings of their companies in terms of profits.

Are you listening? These young ignoramuses who couldn't even recognize Warren Buffett made accurate assessments about companies based on the face of the CEO. The conclusion is obvious: instant judgements are accurate.

Here's another wrinkle in the story. Another group of students was shown the same CEO's faces and asked to rate them on competence, dominance, likeability, facial maturity and trustworthiness. The high ratings matched the success of the firms.

Now get this. Researchers from Yale and Pittsburgh U asked sr mgrs to rate their CEO's for the ability to communicate an exciting vision and model good behaviour. They could not, however, on the basis of these assessments find a link between a firm's performance and the boss's personality.

What does that mean? Well we know from the success of the students' assessments that there is a relationship between the leader's personality and the performance of the group that he leads. Therefore, the ignorant students made more accurate assessments than well-informed managers. The conclusion: knowing someone interferes with the ability to judge him well.