Gabriella Panuccio Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 Here I am, going to become a PI very soon…And facing what I think is one of the big challenges when setting up your very first team: hiring the right person. Needless to say, regardless of how thorough we may be, it may always happen to hire a person that eventually fails to meet our expectations. And this can make a huge difference if you’re building your credibility as a PI heading to tenure. Any advice on how to set the interview and some questions that may turn helpful in unveiling skills or limitations of the candidate? I am referring to every aspect of the selection process: CV screening, interview with the candidate and interview with the reference or screening of reference letter. Thank you all for your precious feedback! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaadeja Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 What position (s) are you hiring technical, graduate. postgraduate, research? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriella Panuccio Posted October 24, 2018 Author Share Posted October 24, 2018 I am starting with postdocs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaadeja Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 That is a good place to start they are mobile . I will give my 2 cents worth later on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iratrofimov Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 I suggest taking the STQ test (here are the forms, free, I would use the Excel forms for simplicity - https://fhs.mcmaster.ca/cilab/PS/PS-STQ.htm#testing), it will take 10-15 min max. Pick people with high PL, PRO and ERI scales. Stay away from low ERM-TMM and too high ERS, especially if it comes with CNTL (validity scale) higher than 12. This is if you need a working horse who is smart, doesn’t ask questions and is reliable. Also ignore flattering reference letters, the whole business of reference letters really damages hiring process in academia. Ask a candidate at least 4 practical questions that are relevant for your research program. You need someone competent and not somebody who is using your money and time to just start learning. Plus look at the list of interests and projects that they tried in life time. People with good dopaminergic system get involved in many things for a reason - because they have high plasticity to perform different tasks. You need them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriella Panuccio Posted October 27, 2018 Author Share Posted October 27, 2018 @iratrofimov, thanks for your detailed suggestion. I am not running a company, but a research lab where creative minds are a must, since the project is high-risk/high-gain. Also, the funding scheme is about community building and establishing a new ecosystem. Besides the fact that I think that my research institution will not endorse pre-screening using a test, I also personally have my own doubts about its actual usefulness and fairness, because I believe that there are aspects that only our gut feeling can spot. This is especially true in my case, because I don’t need and I will never want to have “a working horse” who “doesn’t ask questions”, rather the opposite. In my lab, people must be proactive, creative and ask a lot of questions. Hard workers are welcome, but treating my lab members like working horses is against my principles. Also, training through research is a fundamental aspect, regardless of the scope of the action that funded my project. I believe that training and mentoring is our moral obligation as scientists, if we want to grow the scientists of tomorrow that will pursue what we have started today. So, yes, I will have PhD students who will be paid to learn, although at a later time. People with a good dopaminergic system…How do I spot them?!! I think this is a bit futuristic in a selection process… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iratrofimov Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 Hi Gabry, the test was used by HR pple for decades, and I gave you an advice as a professional and as an academic psychologist studying psychometrics. My advice did sound pragmatic and cynical, and your reply sounds like moralizing. I didn’t imply that you are running a company but your task is a typical HR task, how to conduct the selection of the candidates. In my research activities I face this problem occasionally, and I spoke from experience. It seems like you have your reservations about “usefulness and fairness” of the test even before you reviewed its psychometrics or validation history. In general your response sounds like “don’t tell me what to do, I know better”, Why bother asking for advices then? Sorry that I wasted your and my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriella Panuccio Posted October 27, 2018 Author Share Posted October 27, 2018 Dear @iratrofimov, I appreciated your suggestion and I am sorry that my answer sounded judgemental, but you should not take this on a personal level. My question was not about the hiring procedure per se, but how to identify a candidate…The line is very thin, I understand. Also, don’t give for granted that I haven’t gone through the history of validation, etc. I read a lot about these things because I am interested in understanding better, and I actually just took the test myself out of curiosity. In this regard, I would have also appreciated a pdf on how to interpret the results… My major concern is and has always been that people taking these tests tend to answer according to the image they have of themselves, or what they wish they could be, rather than providing an objective assessment of themselves. In this regard I think that the test should be taken by those familiar with the candidate, but I digress… Honestly speaking, I find the terms “working horse who doesn’t ask questions” and “using your money and time to just start learning” quite strong and definitely not what I am looking for. Sincerely speaking, I am surprised to read such expressions in the Neuronline forum, where advocacy, training and mentoring have a strong value. But, again, I might as well be misinterpreting what you meant here. Last but not list, I am not a trained psychologist, nor an HR specialist nor will I ever leave the pre-screening of candidates to the HR, or base my decision on a score. I am talking about finer aspects here, more related to emotional intelligence if we want to remain in the psychology field. If I were a candidate asked to take such a test, I would withdraw my application, because I’m sure I’m not going to like my boss. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iratrofimov Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 Thank you for your explanation, Gabry, I sensed that you are not specialist in tests or talking to candidates - that is why I hoped to save you a long learning curve that I passed in my research and cut to the bottom of it. I never suggested using just test - in my initial message I recommended to ask practical questions. Main approach in selection of candidates for research (not just hiring) is to have multiple sources of info, and just having personal conversation is far-far from enough. Sociopaths are famous for smooth and friendly talks to get what they want. That is why while selecting people for a task (paid or not) it is advisable using at least 3 sources of info: 1-st hand contact (interview), psychometrics and analysis of facts about their personal and professional experience. I am in this field of research for 30 years, it’s too much to explain why should you look at the factors that I’ve mentioned. The way you are sceptical to testing told me that you were not psychologist, and in psychology there is a way to control for what you worried about (we call it “social desirability bias”), and also several other biases that you didn’t mention yet. Re: “working horse” is a casual expression for people with good endurance who can stay in the lab till 11 pm, if needed. “doesn’t ask questions… and doesn’t need much learning” meant that you needed an experienced candidate and not a newcomer. It sounds romantic when a candidate is a “blank sheet” and looks at your mouth for everything, treating you as mommy and following you everywhere, verifying everything. But in real research you have no time for this, you will barely have time for completion of research even when the candidate gets on the task right away and starts working. Grants are usually set a rather short time for good research as there are always deviations from the declared program, delays due to samples, due to re-checks, revision of hypotheses, writing up summaries and papers, etc. You can’t afford even two months to lose for a training of your candidate, for efficient research. So, I was talking pragmatically, and experienced practicing researchers knew what I meant. Hopefully. Training and mentoring are always present in research process, even for most experienced researchers, just because that every research is always original in some way, even while repeating previous results. However researchers can’t afford taking a “curious-in-science” but uneducated in the subject housewife for training, they need someone who can contribute to their research with additional experience. That is why I suggested asking practical questions and range of interests. These are my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriella Panuccio Posted October 27, 2018 Author Share Posted October 27, 2018 @iratrofimov I see that we are on the same page then Besides sociopaths, and I have met some, all the things that you mention later on are exactly the reason why I am seeking for some tactical advice. Although this is my very first experience as a PI, I have many years experience in coordinating research (North American system, you know…). On the technical & knowledge level, I know exactly what I need and consequently what to ask in order to spot the right candidate with regards to the scientific side, and those are the pre-requisites to apply. I strongly agree with you that if I need an electrophysiologist expert in a specific technique or brain disorder, I will stick to that and never hire a molecular biologist who claims he/she is a fast learner (forget it!). But this is obvious Similarly, an experienced person in my lab must also know very well the tech-spcs of the equipment in use in order to be capable of technical independent thinking and troubleshooting, so not to keep the experimental work stuck for minor problems. I have seen senior post-docs with super references being completely lost when they had to figure out where to plug a cable, which was supposed to be the bread and butter of their technical expertise, whereas they were there just to push a button and if any problem arose, they were completely stuck and not willing to even go through the manual, waiting for someone to plug the cable for them (yes, I have witnessed this myself!)… This past experience taught me that I need to ask specific questions in order to unveil the actual technical skills, depth of knowledge, independent thinking and proactive mindset of the candidate. What leaves me a bit perplexed is the personal side that you also mention, which, as weird as it may sound, may prove even more detrimental to a project than the lack of knowledge itself. Some people are arrogant, some others are not self-confident enough, some are individualists, others are team workers…and I don’t plan on baby-sitting, I agree with you. The STQ test contains some questions that I could actually ask on a personal level, as a workaround to my sense of uneasiness administering a psychometric test to my candidates (besides the fact that I think this practice may not be accepted by the HR in my institution). And my initial question was actually related to this: interview strategy. Some prospective PIs like to ask open questions, like “tell me more about yourself”, etc. Regarding the reference letters, we all know how useless and biased they are (most are written by the applicant and then endorsed by the reference). In this regard, I’d rather speak with the reference person directly (time permitting) and ask, for example, why that person became the selected candidate among how many others; did the person meet the expectations; weaknesses and strengths (no weaknesses is a red flag…)… So I re-formulate my question: any strategic question one may ask to the candidate and to the reference person to address plus and minus aspects, beyond competence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iratrofimov Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 Gabry - and I iterate my advice then For the interview: just design practical questions, pay less attention to sweet talks and emotional bonding during the contact, that’s what sociopaths are good at. Social skills are independent of practical and scientific knowledge, you can have potentially 4 different combinations in this regards. Never rely on the interview only, complement it with other sources of info, such as testing and facts (not reference letters but indeed calls to referees) about candidate’s behavior. As I wrote, sociopath’s profile is: high ERS + CNTL>12-13, often low NEU and above average SLF. These profiles do not mean automatically the guaranteed sociopathy, but might be one of the flags to explore. For working qualities I already mentioned the scores to look at. You are free to use whatever forms you want in if the interviews are done for potentially paid activities, or if activities are financed from some institution (such as education). Only for voluntary activities you might have some limitations, but even then it is all about the participant’s consent. You have a classic psychological task in task - to screen candidates for a task, so I just gave you an advise how professionals would do it. THe STQ is one of the least “personal” tests, it is not a personality but temperament test, and it is the most compact in its class and covers more scales. It is also the only test tuned to neurotransmitter model of individual differences (FET). So, if you are not familiar with testing practice and are afraid of it, ok, don’t use any, you will lose valuable source of info but, o, well… However, if to use any test, this is ideal for a neuroscientist. Just trust specialists in psychometrics, i.e. technicians in psychological testing, similarly you trust car builders, technicians, and you don’t check under the hood every time you drive a car. Pdf-s for the STQ describing the scales are online, on the same page, but I can see that without practice of using it you might hesitate touching it indeed. A dialog with referees is a good idea but often is not much better than reading their letters: you will have flattering emotional judgements but no info on if a person knows how to plug the cord or how to solve methodological problem. Often referees just want to push the candidate to that research program, for various reasons, not necessarily to promote their own work. The less you rely on conversations and judgements and the more on objective info, the better. Re: analysis of personal info, it is a long-long story indeed, I didn’t want to get into details. It’s enough material to give a whole course. In brief, however, for your specific task, as I wrote, look at the width of interests and experience (N of hobbies or how serious they are, how many languages a person knows, travel experience, part-time jobs, if a person lives independently or with parents) is an indicative of person’s capacities to put together a new program of actions. That what you are discussing in the interview - “do you have any other interests? Were you born here? Employment history… Do you like social activism?”, “What would be your ideal plan for your future, in research or in jobs?” - and monitor how extensive plans are, how realistic and detailed they are. People with strong DA processes already have a history of engagement in several projects by the age 20, and they will be very easy trained, flexible in adaptation to new instructions and offering new ideas. You already have good ideas how to approach this selection task, so just keep complementing your ideas with insights from professionals who are in the business of this sort of tasks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriella Panuccio Posted October 27, 2018 Author Share Posted October 27, 2018 Thanks @iratrofimov, very useful indeed PS: my ERS = 22 and CNTL = 13… I hope I’m not on my way to becoming a sociopath…poor post-doc of mine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iratrofimov Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 What’s your NEU, SS and SLF? Plus I should of mention TMS, not ERS, sorry, upps Plus, as I wrote, not all pple having a specific profile have sociopathy, but all sociopaths have this profile. They are not anxious (low NEU) and they are confident (high SLF), often like risks (SS) - that’s the signature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriella Panuccio Posted October 27, 2018 Author Share Posted October 27, 2018 Ahah, thanks Then theoretically I cannot be a sociopath, since I am anxious TMS= 21 NEU = 16 SS = 13 SLF = 18 I hope readers won’t think we are playing bingo with all these numbers… I know it’s off topic here, but I’m curious by nature Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iratrofimov Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 Not sure about your anxiety but at least you might not be neurotic (not the same thing), your NEU is average/normal and so your SLF. TMS is usually entangled with ERS, so I should of write ERS-TMS together, however when TMS>ERS this is also a little hint for sociopathy, in cases when both are high. I am sure readers, if any, enjoy the show and so far this is a simple human nature. It’s useful for the whole community to see the integration between neuroscience and psychology, especially with practical applications. Besides, your temperament is not news to anybody who knows or will know you. Still, thank you for sharing it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in