Doesn’t get you all the signals you’d want but if you care about e.g. clarity of thought it’s quite signalful and, unlike their written output, less likely to be indefinitely siloed or materially the work of other people.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Easier to get signal on “Can this person usefully pitch X to e.g. a candidate?” by listening to them attempt to do that rather than by hoping a reference check remembers that particular facet of reality really clearly and doesn’t confuse it with “So did you like them?”
Show this thread -
Also think it’s likely to be far less distorted than e.g. asking them the same set of questions in a job interview. “We’re curious how you’d perform in our open, collaborative work environment, so I thought I’d test with hostile questioning by a bored person you won’t work with”
Show this thread -
“And maybe you’ll be well-poised and affable during that conversation so I will give your simulated teammate the explicit instruction to undermine you and or lie to you. To see what happens, you know. Might not hire based on your reaction, naturally.”
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
would be nice if everyone just had like 10 hours of footage of them in meetings of various configurations that could be viewed
-
The new doctrine of “radical transparency” is reshaping everything in civilization, including your social credit score.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.