Hacker News Reader

Comment by gnfargbl | Hacker News Reader

The set up of this article doesn't make a lot of sense. It describes a case where "not a good fit" was in fact exactly that; the candidate wanted an open workplace where he could express opinions and grow his skills, the hiring manager wanted an experienced resource who would do as they were told and not rock the boat.

Both types of workplace exist, and both types of candidates exist. The question for me is why the article author sent a type-A candidate into a type-B workplace. So that they could write an article about how they "educated" the VP?

View on HN

> do as they were told and not rock the boat

This is a problem. It means the best output you're going to get is that of the level of the person doing the telling rather than the person who's first-hand doing and learning. I see this all the time. I once wondered why sometimes a new club/bar would open up, sparing no expense, but then the music would sound like shit. Not the sound system, but the DJ. It's because they were hired by someone who had more money than sense and didn't actually have good taste.

People being bad at at hiring is really orthogonal to whether people want someone who just does what they're told, or who also partially controls the direction of their work. You're making the assumption that it's some idiot owner hiring people, when it could just as easily been that the owner has hired someone with a particular vision to run their company, and that person needs you not for your creativity, but your level of craft.

It doesn't make me bad at hiring painters if I don't want them to have a say in the color.

Any place I work would offer more autonomy than being cog in the company. Somewhat more like as an interior designer than as a painter. It's hard to imagine a painter as executing a vision. I certainly agree that the degree varies by level of role.

You probably meant a house painter, as opposed to an artist..

I think the point of the article is that you should not want to build a type-B workplace. If you want innovation - and healthy companies should want that - you should hire people asking critical questions

Cause its HBR. Conventional HR wisdom doesn't believe in nuance when its coming from the employers side - everything must be repeatable, process driven, and very corporate. Deviating off of that, is scary because it introduces bias into the mix and HRs responsibility is protecting the company. Having a hiring process that is personalized to a specific candidate is a no-no.

> experienced resource who would do as they were told

That's a contradiction right there. If experience is important, the "resource" can't do as they are told. If they can, experience is not important.

> and not rock the boat

And that's a different kind of attitude that has absolutely no relation to independence.

Anyway, from the article:

> He said: “He asked us a ton of questions that the team didn’t have the answers to.”

If you don't have the answers, you are clearly unfit to manage "resources". If you want blind followers, you better have all the answers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com