Idontknowmyuser

I've been thinking about hiring processes in General and I think some of the problems that they face are a result collapsing a complex question very hastily into a binary decision.

Therefore I propose a "multi-layered" decision process, where the final step is made automatically. (This is obvious and I know it's probably not new, if your company tried this in the past I will be happy to hear about it)

First essential rule: "if the candidate has the highest amount of points and is willing to accept the offer, s/he gets hired"

Now, unlike other systems which try to prescribe, this system attempts to describe.

We define "a reason" as any true, legal (as in non-discriminatory) statement about the candidate that is precise enough.

Each reason can be assigned a number of points (negative or positive). The interviewer has complete freedom to assign as much points as he wants to any reason but is advised to respect previous jurisprudence and to justify himself in the cases where he goes against it.

Valid reasons can range (just examples) form: "S/he got Y GPA in University X" to "s/he didn't say hello at the start of the interview" Invalid reasons are for example "unprofessional attire" this is invalid because it is vague. Reasons need be blunt and precise. "S/He wore X and Y" should be valid.

Claim A: this makes the hiring process more traceable and open by providing a paper trail

Claim B: this fights part of the unconscious bias. By requiring interviewers to think and write down reasons. They can examine more critically their decisions.

Claim C: this helps control for overreaction. Assigning helps insure that the effect of each reason is reasonably proportional. I think many would be ashamed to write (-50) for just not saying hello but I worked with people petty enough to reject for less.

char limit, 1/2 to be continued at: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16105130