Case Interview Question & Answers (Part 10 of 12) | caseinterview
Summary
TLDR在这段视频中,演讲者分享了关于企业招聘系统的见解,特别是针对CEO们的建议。他强调,如果公司吸引的人才不符合预期,应该回过头来系统地修正招聘流程。许多公司现在采用更多的测试和实证数据来驱动决策,以评估候选人在团队合作和呈现能力上的表现。演讲者提到了几种不同的面试方法,包括小组案例研究,以及如何通过模拟真实商业环境来评估候选人的协作和客户交流技能。他还提到了面试过程中时间管理的重要性,以及如何在发现问题的核心(AHA时刻)后,决定何时深入探究或转向其他问题。
Takeaways
- 📈 **招聘系统反馈**:如果招聘到的人才不符合预期,需要系统性地回顾和改进招聘流程。
- 📊 **数据驱动的决策**:公司更倾向于通过实证数据来评估候选人在团队合作和演示中的表现。
- 💬 **群体面试**:通过小组案例分析,观察候选人的团队合作能力和问题解决技巧。
- 🎓 **教育背景的误区**:不应仅凭教育背景判断一个人的能力,实际表现更为重要。
- 📝 **案例演示**:候选人需要展示他们如何整合信息并进行有效的客户演示。
- 🚫 **客户呈现问题**:如果候选人在客户面前表现不佳,可能会对公司业务产生负面影响。
- 🤝 **人际交往能力**:在面试中测试候选人的人际交往能力,以确保他们能在内部和客户之间建立良好关系。
- 🧐 **环境影响**:面试环境可能会影响候选人的表现,因此需要在类似实际工作环境中评估他们。
- 🕒 **时间管理**:在面试过程中,根据时间限制来平衡对问题的深入探讨和全面覆盖。
- 🔍 **寻找关键点**:在解决案例时,要识别并专注于关键因素,同时注意不要过度深入而忽略了其他重要问题。
- 📚 **真实案例的复杂性**:使用真实案例可以让候选人面对更复杂、不那么直接的问题,从而更好地评估他们的能力。
Q & A
在招聘过程中,如果招聘到的员工不符合预期,应该采取什么措施?
-如果招聘到的员工不符合预期,应该回过头去系统性地修正招聘系统。
为什么一些公司在招聘过程中会进行更多的测试和收集经验数据?
-公司进行更多的测试和收集经验数据是为了基于数据来驱动决策,判断候选人是否适合团队合作的环境以及他们是否能够有效地进行展示。
在团队面试中,给一组三个人一个案例进行讨论的目的是什么?
-目的是观察候选人在团队合作中的表现,以及他们是否能够共同解决问题。
在招聘过程中,为什么展示能力很重要?
-展示能力很重要,因为它涉及到候选人是否能够向客户有效展示和沟通,这对于保持客户关系和业务独立性至关重要。
为什么一些公司在面试过程中会测试候选人的人际交往能力?
-测试人际交往能力是为了确保候选人在内部或与客户交流时不会表现出过于粗鲁或不专业的行为,这可能会对公司的形象和业务产生负面影响。
在面试中,如何判断候选人是否适合公司的文化和工作环境?
-通过将候选人置于模拟的工作环境或社交场合中,观察他们在这些情境下的行为和反应,从而判断他们是否能够融入公司的文化和工作环境。
在面试过程中,面试官如何决定何时从一个问题转向另一个问题?
-面试官会根据时间限制和面试的节奏来决定。如果一个分支的问题讨论得太久而没有明显的结论,面试官可能会选择转向下一个问题。
在面试中,面试官如何识别候选人的'AHA'时刻?
-面试官会寻找候选人在讨论中表现出洞察力或理解力的关键时刻,这通常是候选人对问题有深刻理解并提出有见地解决方案的时候。
为什么面试官有时会使用非传统的案例或即兴的情境来进行面试?
-使用非传统或即兴的案例可以让面试官看到候选人在压力下的表现,以及他们如何快速适应新情况并进行创造性思考。
在面试中,候选人应该如何处理他们认为面试官故意设置的障碍?
-候选人应该保持冷静,尝试理解面试官设置障碍的意图,并尽可能地展示他们的解决问题的能力和适应性。
面试官在面试结束时通常会寻找什么?
-面试官在面试结束时通常会寻找候选人是否能够提出有说服力的结论或建议,以及他们是否能够合理地总结案例并提出下一步的行动方案。
为什么面试官会倾向于使用真实的案例而不仅仅是虚构的数字?
-使用真实的案例可以让面试官更准确地评估候选人处理复杂和实际问题的能力,因为真实案例的数字更加复杂,不容易得出显而易见的结论。
Outlines
😀 招聘系统与人才筛选
本段落主要讨论了与众多CEO合作的经验,尤其是在招聘系统方面的建议。强调如果招聘到的人才不符合预期,应该回过头去系统性地修正招聘流程。提到了当前许多公司采用更多的测试和实证数据来驱动决策,以评估候选人在团队合作和客户呈现方面的能力。描述了几种不同的面试场景,包括小组案例研究和个人呈现能力测试,以及这些方法背后的逻辑,比如通过模拟真实工作环境来观察候选人的行为。
🧐 面试过程中的时间管理
第二段落简短,没有提供足够的信息来形成一个完整的主题,但可以推测它可能与面试过程中对候选人的观察有关,尤其是面试官如何注意到候选人的某些特质。由于信息不足,无法提供详细的总结。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡CEO
💡招聘系统
💡数据驱动
💡团队合作
💡案例面试
💡呈现能力
💡框架
💡客户关系
💡面试环境
💡时间管理
💡问题解决
Highlights
CEO们在招聘过程中面临的挑战,以及如何通过系统化的方法来改进招聘流程。
公司在招聘过程中越来越依赖于测试和经验数据来评估候选人的团队合作能力和表达能力。
通过小组案例研究的方式来测试候选人的协作能力和问题解决技巧。
候选人在面试中的表现可能反映了他们在客户面前的表现,这关系到公司业务的成败。
面试过程中的即兴案例分析,面试官可能会根据窗外的景象即兴提出问题。
面试者需要在有限的时间内展示自己的分析能力和问题解决技巧。
面试官可能会根据候选人的回答即兴调整问题,增加面试的难度。
面试中的真实案例与模拟案例的区别,真实案例的数据更加复杂且结论不那么明显。
面试者需要识别问题的关键点,并在面试中做出合理的判断和调整。
面试时间的分配对面试者表现的影响,如何在有限时间内有效地展示自己的能力。
面试官可能会根据面试的进展即兴提出新的问题,考验面试者的应变能力。
面试者在面试中应该避免过度深入一个点而忽略了其他重要的问题。
面试者在找到问题的关键点后,应该如何有效地推进讨论并提出解决方案。
面试官对于面试者在面试中表现出的团队合作精神和沟通技巧的重视。
面试者在面试中应该如何处理与面试官意见不一致的情况。
面试官可能会根据面试者的表现和反应来调整面试的难度和方向。
面试者在面试中应该如何识别并利用时间节奏来优化自己的表现。
面试者在面对复杂问题时,如何做出合理的判断并提出多个可能的解决方案。
Transcripts
here I also work with lot of CEOs and
sort of advising on how to run your
businesses and one of the things I work
with them on is recruiting and
oftentimes what I tell them is that you
have a recruiting system if the kind of
recruits are getting you don't like you
should go back and you want to
systematically fix the system right so
what a lot of firms seem to be doing is
they seem to be doing a lot more testing
and getting empirical data right because
we're data driven on whether or not the
candidates are good in the collaborative
environment and whether they can present
ok so the variations I've heard but I
have never been in a scene personally or
they will give a case to a group of
three people and you sort of do it
together
right so basically what that ability is
I mean they want to see if an
and that's really what it is right
because you could even if you're in
there with somewhat peoples motor
schools
if you pull what I call you know and
Good Will Hunting the Harvard with
Harvard you know we think that it's this
right dude you're gone right
other ones are I've seen I've heard of
cases where it's all done and now you
have to present so that's not more
similar to what you guys are used to and
that's more about can someone synthesize
and so what I infer from that if certain
firms probably had problems with getting
people who could do frameworks and cases
but they couldn't present to clients and
so therefore they were no longer
independent rights which cause issues in
terms of how they think about their
business and same with like
collaboration if they're getting people
who are sort of very abrasive to end up
good people skills either internally or
especially with the client I mean like
if you screw up a client situation
that's like really bad and so they're
probably testing a lot of that and once
you understand the mindset which we
talked about this morning makes a lot of
sense right if you're concerned about
people being jerks then you put them in
a club environment and you see if they
become a jerk and if you're in a jerk
and an interview environment they're
likely to be a jerk you know in a client
situation same with collaboration and
that's apply a big one because they're
you just want to pretend like you're not
an interview and do it like you would in
a regular business environment and it
really is well peers if it's a good idea
so it's a good idea let me add to that
or politely say I disagree with that I
think we could go in a different
direction because of XY and Z
so those are sort of variations I've
seen mostly when firms I'd I get the
impression it's not there's still
they're sort of still doing the core
traditional case interviews and then
adding on some of these as opposed to
replacing it that's the impression I
have but I don't know for sure that
probably varies more by individual
interviewer yeah so I wouldn't
necessarily draw a conclusion that a
firm has one blast or another until I'll
tell you how I started interviewing it
was
oh crap someone's sick today Victor can
you step in I mean that right by the way
you got three minutes so comfy elevator
okay I got you a case
gotcha snowing outside wow they're ice
skate I'm doing ice skating case okay
and so you know the interview is
thinking like you know I'm trying to
like sabotage them you know make life
difficult and I'm just trying to get you
off my to-do list right and I just
pulled something just looking out the
window I saw something interesting and
I'm making up numbers just like I did
earlier today because I was just happy
to the situation if I was sort of had
little more advance notice
I probably organize my thoughts my
current case remember some key numbers
see the sort of a des plaines would be a
nice clean case and then and my
preference would be to actually use a
real case because the numbers are more
interesting so the only difference
between is what a real case was the ones
you sort of see me sort of demonstrate
will be you will get more hard numbers
and it won't be as elegant and clean and
obvious a conclusion as like the NBA
China case where I clearly wanted to
make one conclusion it'll be a little
more convoluted so it's a little harder
it won't be obviously one key factor
driving it'll be like one big thing one
medium thing a lot of little things and
they have to sort of recognize that and
make some adjustments accordingly
a judgment call when you're going to the
next few cases you mind helping us kind
of look at when when you've kind of
found the AHA okay part because I feel
like someone must have a tendency to go
really deep and even pass the AHA we're
trying to dig a bit good point okay find
problems two and three because we can't
get off solving um I'll give you okay
I'll do that and also give you a little
thumb it's partly a function of time
yeah okay so if you have a 40-minute
case in every watched a 30-minute case
interview your framework has you know
four parts right so you get like what
seven seven minutes 7.2 minutes whatever
it is per branch if it's a very
interesting one you go ten minutes
you're probably okay if you're still a
hour twenty minutes you get one branch
and you get 10 min to do the other three
you probably won't get enough of the
information to make an intelligent sort
of recommendation so a part of it is
sort of time-based and the rhythm is
it's interesting and clearly like
clearly relevant but a little
counterintuitive you're not sure what's
going on but something weird is going on
it's worth the extra time otherwise you
hit seven minutes it's probably a good
time to sort moving on but I'll do that
because I actually asked a good point I
can see why someone would notice them
you
Weitere ähnliche Videos ansehen
Webinar | ¿Cómo aumentar la competitividad a través de la logística en las Pymes?
Self-reflective RAG with LangGraph: Self-RAG and CRAG
Performance Management for a 21st Century Organization (SHRM Conference, 2015)
AI and the Future of Cleaning Companies: Should You Be Worried?
Supply Chain Resilience During COVID 19 and Beyond
OpenAI发布会快速解读+全程双语回放|地表最强模型GPT-4o免费发布|AI进化论-花生
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)