Hi, Ken, thanks for your precious considerations.
I would like to compare your experience with the point of view offered by Scoutible (www.scoutible.com), the brand new online platform for automating hiring through a video game. Let me write down some personal considerations:
- Automating an evaluation process and assigning a ranking to each applicant are nothing but an enforcement of a “traditional” entrepreneurial perspective, based on a questionable idea of efficiency. I think that really innovative companies operate in an uncertain context (cfr. LEAN guidelines) and need to express their hidden potential. Hidden into their employees. This means that we can’t evaluate a person without laying other aspetcts of his/her personality, that may turn very useful in the future.
- When we delegate to AI the evaluation of applicants, we can’t forecast the unpredictable. We’re simply saying that we won’t consider the possibility that the unpredictable happens, or that we don’t need it at all. That’s like saying future will be as present is, and that’s a self-evident contradiction of what everybody know in any business market.
- Using AI, we are giving up to our own humanity. There are some particularly important points in your article:
a: you want to get surprised;
b: you need to compare yourself with your spokesman.
Well, no AI will ever want to be surprised by someone.
I think the most important message of your article (and the meaning of your experience) is that qualitative evaluation is the only possible answer to the innovation needs of a company or enterprise.