Author Archives: ev1

Are we entering an era of Neuromanagement?

Posted on by

Will you be taking a brain-scan for your next job interview? Jim Heskett explores the emerging world of neuromanagement and what it means for both organizations and employees. What do YOU think?

or years, behavioral scientists have been telling us that they have a great deal to contribute to decision theory and management. Their work most applicable to business, however, was often overshadowed by that of economists. But as the assumptions of rational behavior and "perfect information" that formed the basis of much of the work in economics concerning markets came into question, behavioral science not based on those assumptions gained ascendance.

At first, the contributions from behavioral science were based on laboratory tests, too many of them involving handy college students. They helped describe biases (at least among those being tested). For example, we learned that people tend to devalue long-term returns in relation to short-term gains. They tend not to buy and sell according to self-set rules.

A person willing to pay up to $200 for a ticket to a sporting event is not, once he owns it, willing to sell it at any price above $200counter to what economists would predict. Behavioral science regards it as perfectly reasonable behavior, explained by what they call the "endowment effect." It is one of many behaviors that help explain why markets are not always "rational," why they may not be a reflection of perfect information, why people buy high and sell low.

A recent study of "midlife northeast American adults" raises questions about whether we are entering the next stage in what might be termed an era of neuromanagement. In it, a group of researchers claim to have found that brain structure and the density of cells in the right posterior parietal cortex are associated with willingness to take risks. They found that participants with higher gray matter volume in this region exhibited less risk aversion. The results "identify what might be considered the first stable biomarker for financial risk-attitude," according to the authors.

The study is a distant cousin to those that have located the side of the brain associated with creativity and the portion of the brain that is stimulated, for example, by gambling or music. Assuming: (1) there will be more research efforts combining the results of brain scans with behavioral exercises, and (2) findings are proven to be more valid than, say, those associated with phrenology, it raises some interesting questions about the future.

Is it possible that some organizations selecting and hiring talent may, in the future, require a brain scan, just as some require psychological testing today? Is hiring on the basis of brain structure much different than hiring, for example, on the basis of height or other characteristics required to perform certain jobs? Or does it raise too many ethical questions? For example, who will own the data? How will it be used? How would we apply the results?

Are we entering the next stage in an age of neuromanagement? What will it look like? What do you think?

See the original post:
Are we entering an era of Neuromanagement?

The Hidden Flaw In Behavioral Interview Questions

Posted on by

Weve all used behavioral interview questionsquestions that ask job candidates to recount a past experience so we can assess their likely future performance. In theory, behavioral interview questions should work just fine (because past behavior is usually a decent predictor of future behavior).

But most interviewers ask behavioral questions in a way that gives away the correct answer and thus ruins the questions effectiveness.

Here are some pretty typical behavioral interview questions:

You probably noticed that all of these questions ask the candidate to recount a time when they successfully did something. The candidate is asked about times they adapted to a difficult situation, balanced competing priorities, made their job more interesting and successfully persuaded someone. And that leads us to the flaw in these questions.

The flaw in behavioral interview questions These behavioral interview questions make very clear that the candidate is supposed to share a success story about adapting, balancing, persuading, etc. No candidate in their right mind would answer these questions by saying Im terrible at persuading people, and my boss is a jerk who never listens to me anyway. Or Im constantly overwhelmed by competing priorities, and I cant live like that.

These questions give away the right answers; cuing candidates to share success stories and avoid examples of failure. But how are interviewers supposed to tell good from bad candidates if everyone shares only success stories? Wouldnt you rather change the question so that candidates feel free to tell you about all the times they couldnt balance competing priorities? Or failed to persuade people? Or couldnt adapt to a difficult situation?

Lets take the question Tell me about a time when you were bored on the job and what you did to make the job more interesting. Because the question gives away the correct answer (talk about going from bored to interested), anyone who answers is going to say something like heres what I did to make the job the more interesting, and I grew professionally, and I was so enriched, etc.

But now, imagine that you tweaked the question to not divulge the answer and you asked Could you tell me about a time when you were bored on the job? Because youre not giving away the correct answer, youre going to hear a wide range of responses.

Some candidates (people who are problem bringers in their current job) are going to say things like OMG, that job was sooo boring and I couldnt wait to quit and I was bored, but hey, I needed the money. Answers like that are a great gift because they immediately tell you not to hire that candidate. And those answers make your job as interviewer much easier because they help you weed-out the weaker candidates.

See more here:
The Hidden Flaw In Behavioral Interview Questions