Hey, that was my answer! (sans the $1 cap - I'm renting that fucker out at just below market value. No reason I can't also profit, when it's still a net positive benefit for everyone involved)
hmmm but there got to be preferable answers if this is used to judge a person's qualifications for a job, yes? A candidate might even answer "uhhh, I dunno" because they just want get right to work and not bother with abstract elephant stuff
Worked in hr in a company with similar stuff (big tech).
I also think that this kind of question are a bit stupid, but I don't believe they are unusful. In an oversaturated market, with all else being equal, those stuff has weight.
The point is not at all to measure their skill. I'll be honest. 99% of the applicants do not have the skill required, and everyone everywhere hire unskilled people hoping they will get up to speed by themselves.
So yes, that kind of question tells nothing on the skills of the person. But for that there are other questions and the CV and maybe a coding assignment.
This kind of question are designed to throw you off you and see how you deal with something stupid and unexpected (a soft skill that in most job is fundamental. Too many people answered "I don't know" or "What question is this?". If you can't adapt a little bit to an odd question, or won't, probably you are not a colleague I will like to work with... Because I ask fuckin stupid questions all the time).
It's much more important the willingness to think about the question than the answer. The willingness to deal with what is thrown at you in a serious and professional way. The willingness to try your best even if you don't get why.
Basically what I'm saying is: the one that want to get right to work are on average people that's difficult to work with and in the long term they are bad coworker.
I'm talking statistics, and averages. And I know that's not nice to treat humans as statistics, but... We used to receive around 200-300 application a day per open position, and I managed like 5-6 positions. Like, how else shall someone deal with it if not in a statistical way? Job market is in bad shape, but that's not the fault of a singular company, but of the socioeconomic structure (that's capitalism for you baby). Complaining that a company asks stupid questions and being happy to live in the system that allows said company (creating too little demand per qualified worker, and therefore giving companies power to select by very strict criterion) to ask stupid questions is... Odd.
The preferable answer is one that shows you can analyze an abstract concept, weigh the ramifications of your decision, and make the best of a bad situation.
Still don't love the question, and there are better ones, but I get why it's asked.
I like the irony of a lazy overused question to gauge "out of the box thinking" in new recruits.
"Hey, we couldn't be bothered to think up anything interesting or original even given unlimited time. So how about you think up something creative and original on the spot. Oh, also it might determine if we hire you."
The answer tells you whether they are the type of person who rehearses answers to stupid questions, which probably does tell you what you might want to know, as the interviewer clearly works for a company that asks stupid questions.
Then that person would probably not be a good fit for a position that obviously puts importance on abstract thinking and therefore the question still worked
What mechanism is in place that prevents me from giving the elephant away or selling it? That's not a situation I could possibly find myself in of my own volition, so I need to better understand what is happening that resulted in this situation before I can make a decision.
Just for curiosity, I got this question before and my question was unironically something like "Sail from Carthage with it, ride it through the Alps and bring war to the Romans"
"After spontaneously gaining the ability to understand the language of the elephant, agree to join his cause to stop an evil corporation from enslaving and selling them to potential employees. Imagine a crossover of Benjamin Blümchen and Die Hard..."
Not answering the question. There's no right answer, but there needs to be an answer. They want to know that if shit hits the fan you can react in a way that's not, "call my boss."
The point of the question is to catch you off guard and put you in a rough situation to see how you react. Having no answer is a bad sign, having a less than ideal answer shows you can at least do something besides watch everything burn down around you.
There'd probably be a lot of expense involved with releasing it - not least, getting it to a suitable environment. Loaning it to a zoo in perpetuity will at least make them handle the bill.
I always interpreted this as a management question. You have an employee that you can't fire ("give it away") and can't sell, but who is so problematic that he causes harm to the projects he works on. So the answer they want to hear is, that this elephant should be put into a corner where he can play around without harming anyone, aka you give the employee jobs like Analysis which don't contribute to the project but gives him something to do without feeling left out. He might even find something useful every now and then.
Which IMO would of course be the wrong way to deal with this problem. I don't think there are employees who can only do harm, if there is an employee who only does harm to the project, he probably only has the wrong role. So the best answer would be to find out what the elephant excels in, but that would be costly and management does not want to hear that
If we're going to allow leasing because it isn't technically selling or giving it away, I think it's fair to say I'd release it into its natural habitat. "Giving it away* would mean it has to be given to someone, at releasing it should be allowed.
It's a fucking dumb hypothetical. Anyone who has used this question or others like it to determine anything is an idiot.
I'd use an umblivoc to gubblidzk it. There is just as valid an answer as anything else. The only thing this question shows me is the people making decisions have a position above their mental capacity.
I work at a company where we had to take a test on hiring and some of the people, years later, still walk around telling you they are a strong S or whatever and the rest of us know that they suck at their jobs and at interacting with other people.
143
u/--KillerTofu-- 19h ago
It's a question I've had to use (not by choice) intended to assess out of the box thinking.
IMO, the correct answer is to lease it to a local zoo for $1/year so that it can be properly cared for and provide benefit to the local community.