2007APR020950
'You may have someone with a very high IQ but has low interpersonal skill .. cannot relate to other people very well. Cannot understand other people. This can be a real liability for organisations who are looking for leadership .. looking to promote people with high intelligence' [1]
Interesting. I posted a similar post this week on the characteristics found in entrepreneurs ~ http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=7459
'... all we'll care about is one measure: how close one comes
to the best founders. We don't care what atoms are in that
molecule ...' [2]
But testing for characteristics of 'high achievers' then correlating test scores against potential applicants is fraught with problems. Is the correlation against the best enough? [3]
I'm sure you might get some correlation but it's pretty unimaginative [4]. So what could be a better tool? What about direct testing of skill? Wouldn't a better technique be simulation? Why not build a 'startup simulator' where applicants are given tools to simulate tasks they actually will have to do? Then you have a controllable scenario where you really can measure results against successful founders.
You could test
* the conception of an idea
* the building of a (simple) prototype
* quickly find an audience
* find a way to make money off it
Wrapped up in a framework [5] where you test the execution of these tasks you could get a better grasp of the
* skills
* determination
* entrepreneurial audacity
* passion
* humour
* leadership skills needed to succeed.
* risk taking, emotional intelligence
There is a long history of simulators in testing & refining of skills, competency and execution are required. Even Captain Kirk at Starfleet Academy trained, passed (and cheated) on simulators.
Who knows it might even be fun.
Reference
[0] YCombinator News, bootload, 'Response to question on filtering of YC startup applications'
http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=7076
[1] Professor Con Stough, Brain Sciences Institute, 'Director, Centre for Neuropsychology, Swinburne Institute of Technology'
http://www.swin.edu.au/bioscieleceng/neuropsych/stough.htm
[2] YCombinator News PG, 'PG on the nuts and bolts of what YC measurement objectives'
http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=7138
[3] But I do like the simplicity of just looking at a simple set of parameters to make a Gladwellian decision.
[4] In a competitive environment the difference between getting the attention of the right candidates could be the tools used to measure how they stack up against the best .. but actually doing something, learning and getting some feedback.
[5] The framework could be a game, or simply a panel of dials. The key thing is you can have a back room with founders, past entrepreneurs twiddling the dials checking to see in RT how candidates handle things like a person leaving, stressing system etc (like the LEM tester in the Apollo missions). It also allows for candidates to learn from failure with less risk & pass on the best decision making skills to candidates that have passed.
The Morning shot above shows the first bees on a Grevillea Superb in flower (hybridisation of Grevillea banksii and Grevillea bipinnatifida).
I can tell the bee is starting the day because the legs are not yet laden with pollen. Later in the day bees are almost always fully laden.
<<< start
2007APR020950
'You may have someone with a very high IQ but has low interpersonal skill .. cannot relate to other people very well. Cannot understand other people. This can be a real liability for organisations who are looking for leadership .. looking to promote people with high intelligence' [1]
Interesting. I posted a similar post this week on the characteristics found in entrepreneurs ~ http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=7459
'... all we'll care about is one measure: how close one comes
to the best founders. We don't care what atoms are in that
molecule ...' [2]
But testing for characteristics of 'high achievers' then correlating test scores against potential applicants is fraught with problems. Is the correlation against the best enough? [3]
I'm sure you might get some correlation but it's pretty unimaginative [4]. So what could be a better tool? What about direct testing of skill? Wouldn't a better technique be simulation? Why not build a 'startup simulator' where applicants are given tools to simulate tasks they actually will have to do? Then you have a controllable scenario where you really can measure results against successful founders.
You could test
* the conception of an idea
* the building of a (simple) prototype
* quickly find an audience
* find a way to make money off it
Wrapped up in a framework [5] where you test the execution of these tasks you could get a better grasp of the
* skills
* determination
* entrepreneurial audacity
* passion
* humour
* leadership skills needed to succeed.
* risk taking, emotional intelligence
There is a long history of simulators in testing & refining of skills, competency and execution are required. Even Captain Kirk at Starfleet Academy trained, passed (and cheated) on simulators.
Who knows it might even be fun.
Reference
[0] YCombinator News, bootload, 'Response to question on filtering of YC startup applications'
http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=7076
[1] Professor Con Stough, Brain Sciences Institute, 'Director, Centre for Neuropsychology, Swinburne Institute of Technology'
http://www.swin.edu.au/bioscieleceng/neuropsych/stough.htm
[2] YCombinator News PG, 'PG on the nuts and bolts of what YC measurement objectives'
http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=7138
[3] But I do like the simplicity of just looking at a simple set of parameters to make a Gladwellian decision.
[4] In a competitive environment the difference between getting the attention of the right candidates could be the tools used to measure how they stack up against the best .. but actually doing something, learning and getting some feedback.
[5] The framework could be a game, or simply a panel of dials. The key thing is you can have a back room with founders, past entrepreneurs twiddling the dials checking to see in RT how candidates handle things like a person leaving, stressing system etc (like the LEM tester in the Apollo missions). It also allows for candidates to learn from failure with less risk & pass on the best decision making skills to candidates that have passed.
The Morning shot above shows the first bees on a Grevillea Superb in flower (hybridisation of Grevillea banksii and Grevillea bipinnatifida).
I can tell the bee is starting the day because the legs are not yet laden with pollen. Later in the day bees are almost always fully laden.
<<< start