Don't Strain Your Brian - Mind bending puzzles and curly questions riddle today's interview landscape

This post is about an article posted in the Weekend Australian, 14/4/2012 by William Poundstone titled “Don’t Strain Your Brian” which is actually an edited extract from his book titled “Are You Smart Enough To Work At Google?” Due to copyright restrictions I don’t believe I am able to post a copy online. However, if you are interested in reading the article, it can be found here.

Since we sometimes get asked to sit in on interview panels and assist with selection criteria you may already have come across some of the more bizarre interview questions out there. For those that have not, this recent article in the weekend Australian should give an interesting insight into what gets asked.

Personally I’m still on the fence with some of these “left field/creative” questions discussed in the article. “How would you weigh an elephant without using a scale?” “Why are all manhole covers round?” “If you were a cartoon character, which one would you be and why?” (Apparently Yogi Bear is the right answer for that one if you’re at a Bank of America interview.)

Surely if you wanted to test someone’s creative problem solving skills you could provide them a case study more grounded in reality or at least the position they are applying for? Could you really use someone’s favourite cartoon character to help justify a decision on a selection committee report? ...Unless they are applying for Disney, I would hope not.

There are some better left field questions in the article however, most of them coming from Google. These tend to be lateral thinking mathematical problems, probably well suited for software engineers. I would argue a move outside the set standard behavioural questioning can certainly have its advantages, but you need to provide a sound justification for the question, (beyond your own amusement) tied to the selection criteria. Otherwise you’re simply identifying people who are good a talking off the top of their head rather than people which demonstrable skills, key to the position.

Email Blunders - Response to HC Online article

You may have heard about the recent mishap which affected an unfortunate HR team at Aviva, Britain's second-biggest insurer by market value. Basically the stuff of HR nightmares they accidentally sent out a termination letter to all 1,300 staff instead of one.

Human Capital Online wrote an article in response to this, however I actually disagree with most of their points. I will summarise their tips here (my comments are in green). I'd be interested to know your thoughts in the comments below. I am assuming this article is referring to more serious email breaches rather than typos or small non-confidential leaks etc.


1. Forget about retrieving it; you can’t “unsend mail”. – An IT Administrator could theoretically retrieve emails but even then it’s probably not an option.

You can retrieve emails from outlook. If you open the email and click on actions in the toolbar. It gives you the option to either delete sent mail from the person’s inbox or replace it with a new email. If the person has already opened it, outlook will show that the sender tried to retrieve it.


2. Ignore it – most people don’t read all their emails anyway.


I find this quite unprofessional. HR often sends formal communication and advice and thus if it goes to the wrong recipient we need to rectify the situation.


3. Apologise – but only to your boss.

May depend on the seriousness of the error and the amount of people it was sent to but I think recipients need to know if they received something that was not intended for them. This follows on from my issue with point two.


4. Do the full letterman – face-to-face apology is a must to someone you offended.

This one I actually agree with – obviously not in the case of a reply all but if it’s clear the outlook retrieval did not work (it will tell you) then a phone conversation can have much more tact than a further email. This may of course follow up with an apology in writing.

"Best-in-class" Human Capital Management Trends

I came across a free whitepaper titled "Human Capital Management Trends 2012: Managing Talent to Lead Organizational Growth". This study of nearly 300 organisations from November and December 2011 investigates "key strategies, technologies, and capabilities deployed by Best-in-Class HR and talent management practitioners, and the positive impact of those activities on business performance."

I'll post a few interesting points and tables I took from the white paper here but to get the full picture, I recommend you download the paper. Business lingo aside, the report essentially breaks the 300 organisations interviewed into 3 categories: Best-in-Class, Average and Laggards. These categories are made by looking at employee engagement, successor risk management and hiring manager satisfaction.

The report then expands on all the other data surveyed, categorising and linking the results into these three categories. It also references some other models and gives tips at the end for how Average and Laggard companies can move into the next category. One table I particularly liked as it gave quite a lot of information was the one below:

At the end of the paper, as mentioned earlier, it provides notes on how organisations which are not defined as Best-in-Class can lift their game. Additionally the paper also provides a similar 3 key points for Best-in-Class organisations to make sure they keep their top position.  I'll summarise these steps below:

For Laggard Organisations:

• Involve the business in setting HCM (Human Capital Management) Strategy - HR strategy needs to coordinate itself with business strategy this includes stakeholder buy in from the get-go. 
• Define what success looks like - Determine how process will be measured and ensure the organisation has tools in place to actually do so. Only 20% of Laggard organisations had clearly defined metrics for HCM effectiveness. 
• Automate to reduce tactical burden - Free up HR from the tactical activities and allow it to become more strategic by automating workforce management solutions, employee performance management and employee data management/payroll. Laggards clearly lack in these areas vs. Best-in-Class organisations. I for one can vouch for the importance of a versatile and capable HRMIS/Payroll  system in opening up new strategic discussions through powerful HR metrics.

For Average Organisations:

• Set the data free - Make sure the right people have access to the right data. Managers need information to make informed and better decisions - employee profiles, development plans, skill assessments etc. 
• Know what drives the business - Ensure succession management systems are in place and identify the critical roles to the business. If HR doesn't understand how revenue is generated it can build plans to support it. 
• Use assessment data throughout the lifecycle - Pre-hire assessments remain a key identifier of success in this survey but post-hire assessments are just as important as an indicator of which category your organisation will fall into. Plan beyond an employee's first role in the organisation. 

For Best-in-Class Organisations:

• Know your (external) customers - Once you connect HR initiatives to business priorities the next step is to understand the organisation's industry and customers. Use customer feedback to inform HCM decision making. 
• Measure early, measure often - Evaluating HCM plans just one year after implementation is not enough. Develop evaluations into the long term and adjust plans accordingly. 
• Apply analytics to make the case - Even in Best-in-Class organisations only 48% of them use workforce analytics and or reporting tools, even fewer (25%) use predictive/forecasting analytics. Use analytics to provide valuable insight for the organisation. 

Myself... In profile

I appeared in the Autumn Navitas English company newsletter for their in profile section. Apparently I got a bit too excited when filling in their questionnaire and they had to edit me down to fit in! That aside, if you wanted to know a little bit more about me or what I do - the feature below should give you a better idea.